How are the career development opportunities at Article?

Great company culture, amazing leadership, growth opportunities

Sometimes I wished there was a Toronto office but I really liked the flexibility of remote work.

The work/life balance is excellent, allowing for both personal and professional fulfillment. In my team, we were not expected to work on weekends, and summers were particularly chill, with most people wrapping up early on Fridays and having the flexibility to plan their work during the week. The hybrid work model offers great flexibility, while the team members are incredibly helpful and supportive, fostering a collaborative environment. Meetings are kept to a minimum, which allows for more focused work time. The pay was also competitive, and they recently introduced an RRSP program, which is a nice added benefit. Article is a growing, profitable company that is doing well despite the competitive landscape. Nice company events like the summer Olympics and Halloween were great for team bonding, providing a fun way for team members to spend time together in the office. I also loved the fact that I could bring my pet to the office, which made the work environment feel even more welcoming. :)

Career growth opportunities are limited, particularly for senior ICs and mid-level managers. Some internal hires turned managers lack people management skills, which results in inadequate support for their teams. The company sometimes struggles with a lack of clear structure, leading to disorganization and difficulty in managing tasks. Communication and alignment across teams could be improved to reduce confusion and rework. Frequent tech transitions have required significant unlearning and relearning, often without proper risk assessments. The hybrid work model is somewhat inconsistent—people hired remotely before COVID can work from home, but new hires do not have that option. This creates a fluid and sometimes awkward in-office dynamic, where you may end up in the office alone, even if your team is not present. The company is a good fit for those seeking a more fluid, startup-like environment, but may not provide enough structure or growth opportunities for IC roles. Despite hard work, recognition and rewards can sometimes be lacking. Additionally, the feedback mechanism is one-sided, as there’s no opportunity to provide 360-degree feedback, particularly about managers.

The technical team was a joy to work with!

The RTO policy was poorly communicated, implemented, and then there were layoffs for remote people. Management seems scattered with no clear direction (why have all the remote employees come to HQ just to fire them a month later?) 3rd layoffs in 2 years looks very bad. No career opportunities whatsoever. Compensation package (RRSPs and bonuses) came too little too late

The work/life balance is excellent, allowing for both personal and professional fulfillment. In my team, we were not expected to work on weekends, and summers were particularly chill, with most people wrapping up early on Fridays and having the flexibility to plan their work during the week. The hybrid work model offers great flexibility, while the team members are incredibly helpful and supportive, fostering a collaborative environment. Meetings are kept to a minimum, which allows for more focused work time. The pay was also competitive, and they recently introduced an RRSP program, which is a nice added benefit. Article is a growing, profitable company that is doing well despite the competitive landscape. Nice company events like the summer Olympics and Halloween were great for team bonding, providing a fun way for team members to spend time together in the office. I also loved the fact that I could bring my pet to the office, which made the work environment feel even more welcoming. :)

Career growth opportunities are limited, particularly for senior ICs and mid-level managers. Some internal hires turned managers lack people management skills, which results in inadequate support for their teams. The company sometimes struggles with a lack of clear structure, leading to disorganization and difficulty in managing tasks. Communication and alignment across teams could be improved to reduce confusion and rework. Frequent tech transitions have required significant unlearning and relearning, often without proper risk assessments. The hybrid work model is somewhat inconsistent—people hired remotely before COVID can work from home, but new hires do not have that option. This creates a fluid and sometimes awkward in-office dynamic, where you may end up in the office alone, even if your team is not present. The company is a good fit for those seeking a more fluid, startup-like environment, but may not provide enough structure or growth opportunities for IC roles. Despite hard work, recognition and rewards can sometimes be lacking. Additionally, the feedback mechanism is one-sided, as there’s no opportunity to provide 360-degree feedback, particularly about managers.

Some good people are still with the organization, rolling with the punches and treading water up to their chins. I commend you for enduring. This year, the company made commitments to enhance performance incentives and RSP matching, which, while potentially beneficial, have added another layer to overhead costs. This has necessitated further cuts within the organization. Product discounts, beautifully made furniture,

Article has adopted the motto of becoming an “enduring company.” Ironically, the term “enduring” here seems to have a double meaning. While it implies longevity and resilience, it also inadvertently highlights a reality where the company continuously faces and perhaps merely survives through ongoing challenges rather than thriving or innovatively overcoming them. The leadership, particularly the founders, have demonstrated a pattern of poor decision-making that aligns more with reactive preservation of power rather than proactive health and growth of the company. This has been evident in their handling of the company’s rapid expansion, which doubled in size by mid-2022 only to be followed by extensive downsizing and wasted projects. The downsizing was an effort to manage declining sales and unchecked growth, indicating a lack of strategic and financial foresight. There is a lack of willingness among the leadership to challenge their assumptions or accept data-driven insights. When confronted with solid analyses and factual evidence, they have dismissed these findings, choosing instead to continue on a path that aligns with their biases. This reluctance to embrace reality contributes to the company’s need to “endure” rather than excel. The prevalent “old boys’ club” mentality among the executive C-suite male leaders further exacerbates issues of diversity and inclusion. This bias restricts opportunities for advancement and recognition, disproportionately affecting those who do not fit a certain demographic (male or white) or are outside the inner circle. Moreover, the operational processes are overly complex, encumbered with internal contracts and red tape that do more to consolidate control for the COO than to streamline or enhance operational efficiency. Despite the existence of an “organizational excellence” team, little improvement has been made to align these processes with the practical needs of the business or its employees. Given these reflections, the founders should reconsider their current roles and strategies. The company would greatly benefit from engaging an external consultant to provide a fresh perspective and thorough assessment of both productivity and cultural practices. This step is essential if Article truly aims to be enduring in the more positive sense of the word—flourishing over time through adaptability, ethical leadership, and genuine inclusivity.

The people and relationships with your colleagues are the best part of this company.

In the three plus years I have worked for this company it has gone from being an organization I feel proud to work for to one I want to leave. Article has lost its soul and that’s really too bad because I want them to succeed but don’t believe that the current senior leadership is up to that task. The recent rounds of layoffs haven’t helped matters. It’s death by a thousand cuts without a solid strategy, other than cost savings, to back them up. Company culture has fallen each year since I’ve joined. I’ve gone from feeling excited to going to work to counting down the hours until I can log off. Too many good people, especially women, are leaving as they hit barrier after barrier when trying to solve problems and implement changes / improvements. I would caution women from applying or if you do be warned that your career progression will ultimately hit a ceiling. While not overtly discriminatory, few companies ever are, Article is an old boys club where men are seemingly offered more and diverse opportunities than women. As a people leader I’ve been told by my member of the senior leader team that there will come a time where I should “pick a lane” and focus only on leading one functional area. Strange since this advice doesn’t seem to have been offered to many of the men in management and leadership positions. Instead they are responsible for a diverse and wide range of functions while at times lacking the expertise or background to lead them.

Great place for those who thrive in a dynamic environment and want to make a real impact. While there have been growing pains, the progress over the years has been rewarding to witness. Team culture is generally strong (varies by team), and the company values authenticity over corporate politics (for the most part), making it a refreshing place to work. Compensation is fair and there is ample opportunity to grow from within.

If you prefer rigid structures and clear-cut processes, this may not be the right fit. There's still work to be done in problem-solving and process development, but for those with initiative, there's an opportunity to help shape the future. While efforts to address process gaps are underway, the pendulum may be swinging too far. I urge leadership to reassess: How can we instill discipline and clarity of objectives without stifling creative problem-solving and cross-department collaboration? While I don’t believe this is the intent, the current framework may unintentionally suggest otherwise.

- stocked kitchen - open-space concept office, roomy and pretty - friendly coworkers (not management) - let me keep the computer when they laid me off

- took away free lunches on holidays because the office teams didn't like that the warehouse + customer service teams were getting them and they couldn't also have it - very very little opportunity for growth, saw only 2/100 people in my department who "moved up" - after 4 years of employment, received a total of a $1.50 raise. nobody received raises 2 years in a row - forced everyone to go back into the office, despite multiple complaints. multiple people resigned as a result and were never replaced - keeps warehouse team and customer service team on skeleton crews. - once got in trouble because "i didn't use enough emojis" to convey my emotions. there were no emotions to be given in my conversation about my performance review - was almost written up because i logged in 3 minutes late - fake, hyperpositive environment that tries to make you feel like you can be honest, but it's never actually taken well - laid off over 100 employees in the last year but nobody in upper management has been affected whatsoever. management team openly refused to take pay cuts - upper management has poor communication skills, and during all hands meetings will refuse to answer questions despite it being an "open room" for questions

Great place for those who thrive in a dynamic environment and want to make a real impact. While there have been growing pains, the progress over the years has been rewarding to witness. Team culture is generally strong (varies by team), and the company values authenticity over corporate politics (for the most part), making it a refreshing place to work. Compensation is fair and there is ample opportunity to grow from within.

If you prefer rigid structures and clear-cut processes, this may not be the right fit. There's still work to be done in problem-solving and process development, but for those with initiative, there's an opportunity to help shape the future. While efforts to address process gaps are underway, the pendulum may be swinging too far. I urge leadership to reassess: How can we instill discipline and clarity of objectives without stifling creative problem-solving and cross-department collaboration? While I don’t believe this is the intent, the current framework may unintentionally suggest otherwise.