Tegus Reviews

Cons

First, Tegus has an 8:30am-6pm work day. I understand that Tegus has clients on the East and West Coast but there are thousands of B2B companies which clients all around the world, most of whom realize that time zones exist and their business contact are not always going to be available to them. This seems to be an unnecessary move to please the client at the expense of their employees, who are already underpaid for the industry, and now mandated to work a nearly 50 hour work week. The leadership seems to be out of touch as well. Because the employees at Tegus are younger, I think the leadership, who are mostly all wealthy, well-educated individuals, believe that they are justified in paying an uncompetitive salary across roles. The employees from Tegus come from different financial backgrounds and most depend on this job to support themselves and perhaps their families as well. Tegus seems to change compensation standards on a whim, not fully realizing that this truly impacts their employees livelihoods. Also, Tegus seems to place an overemphasis on culture to the point where they come off as a bit unserious. There have been instances where Operations Managers reached out because myself or a colleague didn’t seem happy or excited enough when communicating in our Slack channel. This comes off as micromanaging to the extreme. I think the business is too focused on metrics, but trying to control how employees communicate and their tone seems a bit dystopian. Lastly, Tegus has an extremely long interview process for a low paying entry-level position. If you can get hired at Tegus, you can probably find a better place to work.

Cons

Pay is low and the compensation structure is ineffective. The role can be overwhelming as one tries to meet all metrics while servicing clients and trying to earn a commission, which is highly inconsistent. Despite working hard to meet all goals and metrics, the analyst's success and commission are still reliant on other factors (clients, book of business, account manager, etc.). Taking on multiple projects can be overwhelming, and in order to succeed in all metrics, the analyst needs to work long hours (not just 8:30am to 6:00pm). Overall, the success of the analysts is out of their control, and managers only focus on positive results and repeat the same saying "Let's focus on what we can control". Turnover is high in this role and micromanagement is constant. Constant departmental changes and restructuring since it's a startup and no career progression since it's an entry level job.

Cons

- senior management is too disconnected from sales to manage it as closely as they do and it’s hurting everyone. Middle managers don’t challenge them out of fear and acceptance of the situation. - Marketing is severely dysfunctional. They don’t understand the market and they’re not doing anything impactful yet somehow take credit for a lot. They’re also extremely resistant to any feedback or attempts to collaborate. They just want to tell you why they’re right and you’re wrong. Always. So many of us are surprised that marketing leadership hasn’t been replaced. - product is not as unique as it used to be and not advancing fast enough. Too many distractions with acquired companies has set us back.

Cons

Management does not think through long term impact of decision making. Execution of decision making is poorly, if at all, communicated. No focus on scalability or resources for back of house teams Claims focus on diversity and inclusion however feedback regularly given to neuro divergent employees with no consideration to how their diagnoses could impact their approach to work.

Cons

This organization is operated by cheap leaders and lacks effective management. The compensation is not competitive, which might explain the requirement to sign a non-compete agreement. Employees experience micromanagement and scrutiny when not meeting specific metrics, even though their pay is unaffected by these numbers. Performance is heavily influenced by the specific book of business assigned, a factor that is often overlooked. Even if you operate in a less favorable environment, unless you consistently excel, concerns are often dismissed, fostering an environment where only flawless performance is valued. The compensation structure undergoes frequent changes, consistently resulting in reduced pay. Shortly before my promotion, the performance targets were increased, extending the timeline for my advancement. Upon receiving a promotion, my goals were raised causing a drop in income despite maintaining the same workload. The company offers limited opportunities for upward mobility, resorting to a turnover-based model by letting go of skilled individuals to create space. Despite explicit assurances of job security, the company has a tendency to conduct sudden meetings, revealing employment status through last-minute emails. Raising concerns with senior management is met with retaliation. While the company promotes a flexible work schedule, the reality is that employees are expected to work continuously to be available at a clients beck and call but without receiving overtime pay. The 8:30 AM to 6:00 PM work structure is inconsistently enforced, primarily targeted at individuals facing issues, and doesn't apply to senior leadership. The founders, Tom and Mike, strive to be involved, but frequently struggle to offer transparent responses, particularly concerning decisions like laying off 10% of the company for "financial reasons," despite ongoing expenditures on work events and continued hiring. Instead, their replies are often vague or non-responsive, stating that they "don't have a good answer."