Good science & tech people---but kept in a constrained box. - Lead Scientist FICO Employee Review

4.0
20 Jan 2009
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

In the technical/scientific side, the intelligence and friendliness of most of the co-workers. Hiring for good personality (lack of aggressive arrogance) and high ability. Willingness to help and share. Few egotistical mainpulators I've come in contact with on my side. Science + tech types who get their job done well.

Cons

Internal computer support for scientific needs is woefully underdeveloped (hardware and software) far worse than even basic academic labs, much less a Yahoo or Google. Essentially they have no clue and no distinction between some random app-server and hard-core scientific cluster simulation. Continuous downscaling about what IT will support or offer or install, enforced centralization, and of course totally forbidding science or devel to administer their own systems & software installation (i.e. be root). See "advice to senior management".

Explore other reviews about FICO

5.0
6 Mar 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Salary, work life balance, people

Cons

Nothing much to say, all good

4.0
24 Jan 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

FICO is a great place to work as a software engineer. I had a very positive experience collaborating with smart, thoughtful teammates on technically interesting problems that have real-world impact at scale. The engineering culture values code quality, thoughtful design, and pragmatic decision-making over hype. Leadership was supportive, expectations were clear, and there was a strong emphasis on ownership and accountability. Overall, it’s an excellent environment for engineers who enjoy working on meaningful systems in a stable, well-run organization.

Cons

Slower pace of change compared to startups or high-growth tech companies, which can feel restrictive if you prefer rapid experimentation. Legacy systems and tech debt in parts of the organization that require patience and careful refactoring. Process-heavy at times, with multiple reviews or approvals slowing delivery. Less emphasis on cutting-edge frameworks—the focus is more on stability and correctness than chasing the newest tools.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All