Upper management actively and continuously commits the organization to massive initiatives which are either incomplete or don't exist, leading to a continuous churn in manpower, requirements and roadmap. Dev management will do its best to inform the upper management of the roadmap, but organizationally it's setup to fail. Dev managers often have to risk their careers to simply report the truth in the organization, so many remain silent and let things blow up. Pete, one of the CEOs, has no idea how to manage people, and will actively snipe anyone who sees as a threat to his continuous generation of dubious commitments to customers - a true "Fake it til you make it" approach but on an organizational scale. This results in rushed, incomplete products which are often thrown out so that additional SKUs can be generated which are rushed and incomplete, to be sold to an enraged customer. The company has only been successful because it was in the right place at the right time and secured technology from BIS and contracts with governments who had no better solution. we essentially sold them OFP, renamed it, put some paint on it, and sold it.
The real CEO, Arthur Alexion, is a sociopath who creates an environment where everyone is afraid of him, and thus actively lie to his face about the progress of initiatives. The upper management culture is toxic, competitive and ruthless- and neither Arthur nor the CFO have the slightest idea of how to develop software or manage knowledge workers. This has lead to the most skilled development management leaving the company and a suppressing of the remaining engaged leadership - who are trying to keep the ship afloat in defiance of the management approach. Arthur would never pass an interview as a team lead in the development management, to say nothing as CEO of the company. He would also immediately being fired by the BoD if we were in a more competitive space (e.g. silicon valley). Because we have the luxury of dominating our industry, filled with old bloated dinosaurs like Lockheed and Northrop who are not agile enough to pivot quickly, our lackluster performance is perceived as exemplary.
Compensation at BISIM is extremely challenging. If you know how to navigate the medieval politics you can get paid what you deserve, otherwise expect to be underpaid. If you do get to a point where you're getting paid what you should make, you are now in the crosshairs and a moving target of your performance will accompany it. Luckily the company has very little red tape or bureaucracy, so there are opportunities to advance to different roles. Again remember that the upper management is a "Blame" not a trust culture, so do not expect support if you grow to fill a gap that is being fulfilled - instead you'll be screamed at for it.
Hilariously, when critical reviews are spotted in the company, upper management started creating reviews here to offset them.
