Pros
- Genuinely intelligent and driven people in certain pockets of the business that were great to work alongside - Compensation was extremely competitive, but what you make in total comp, you lose in terms of work-life balance
Cons
- Perpetual shift and thrash in strategic focus, as well as tactical priorities: I never understood why Apollo leveraged OKRs on a quarterly basis, if the entire company knew they undoubtedly be upended 2-3 weeks into the quarter. Whether it was your department's overarching focus or your individual "priority" for the quarter, you could bet on it being a non-priority when the next shiny object came into play. - Zero faith or trust in any individual practitioner to execute in their function, agnostic of level: the amount of times I saw the CEO hijack a call, unapologetically disrupt a demo, or talk over somebody without any care or consideration... yeah, I stopped counting. Not only does this behavior come off as beyond condescending, but it was just not conducive to productivity. Whether it was hours, days, or weeks' worth of curating well-thought out specifications or a presentation, it was bound to be ripped to shreds if it didn't align entirely with the viewpoint of the CEO. - Supremely limited EQ: when elevating or escalating concerns about the overarching "ways of working" issues at Apollo, the feedback generally was "that's just the way it is," and that driving a single initiative through to completion often required the level of bureaucracy akin to passing an act of parliament, burning the candles at both ends until you were entirely burned out to a crisp. Again, it wasn't worth escalating this as a general issue or a specific pain-point, as this was accepted practice across the company... this is why there has been a revolving door of key leaders and phenomenal individual contributors... the uphill battle is seemingly too much for any rational human being to repeatedly confront.