Integrated Research Reviews

3.2

52% would recommend to a friend

(116 total reviews)
avatar

Ian Lowe

Not enough data to show CEO approval

46% positive business outlook

Integrated Research has an employee rating of 3.2 out of 5 stars, based on 116 company reviews on Glassdoor which indicates that most employees have a good working experience there. The Integrated Research employee rating is in line with the average (within 1 standard deviation) for employers within the Information Technology industry (3.9 stars).

Reviews by job title

116 reviews
5.0
30 May 2023

Best

Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Good environment, good behaviour, Best

Cons

No cons, all the best

1.0
10 Jan 2015
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Nothing...Other than I no longer work there. Check with former employees on LinkedIn and ask them how it was. Really one of the worst places I've ever worked. Pathetic that the management has to post false reviews here.

Cons

Everything. Horrible unethical managers that treat their employees terribly.

3.0
21 Aug 2016

Low growth company of 250 people after 25+ years

Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Graduate program in R&D Sydney. The company established a graduate program for software engineers. It is a reasonable place to start a career. If you are good (technically / attitude / people skills), you will get good opportunities to develop across a pretty wide set of technologies and there are people to learn from. Sales in Americas. The sales leader in the Americas (based in Denver) runs a good team and performs well. If you perform well you will do well. If you do not perform well you will be let go quite quickly. Good opportunities in presales and consulting to work in cutting edge UC environments. Marketing leader is good / experienced and seems to run a pretty good team.

Cons

The guy who owns the company (over 50% of shares) and founded the company is an unpleasant bullying piece of work with circumstantial evidence of being somewhat misogynistic. The company is a vehicle for paying him a large income in the millions every year even though he is no longer in an active role (he Chairs the Board but is not on staff) – if you look carefully at the published financial records you see that historically and consistently the vast vast majority of profit is paid out to him and the other shareholders leaving very little to be invested in future growth. The result is a small, low growth company of 250 people after 25+ years that even in Sydney nobody has heard of. Unfortunately he is still heavily involved and has never quite learnt to move away from matters that should not be handled by the Board e.g. pushing for certain people to be promoted / not promoted. This does not impact most people and he has signalled that over the next five years he will move away from the company. Fundamentally while he still has over 50% of the shares and runs the board, the company will be constrained. The company is subsidized by a legacy product line (NonStop / Infrastructure) which today produces about 30% of revenue for almost zero cost / investment. The other product lines (Unified Communications) are arguably still not profitable (over 10 years later) or at least are still heavily propped up by the legacy niche. R&D engagement survey results are very poor and have been for a while. The company pushed out a group of poor performing mainly senior developers over the last year in a pretty harsh exercise. People in product development tend to stay at IR for a very long time as it is a comfortable place to work. It tends to mean that those people stop learning new skills and this reduces their value in the market – there is a fair amount of complacency. Generally if you are staying there for more than three years you are not doing yourself any career favours as it is a small low growth organisation. Product Management team – poorly led and suffering from low morale for a number of years. Now run by someone who knows product management but is conservative / political and suffers from a severe lack of charisma. The team is made up of a number of people who have all been there far too long for their own good or the good of the company. Europe / AP – Europe has been a basket case for the last 10 years. Significantly under-performing in terms of sales with some pretty poor leadership over that time. AP is largely channel driven – again successive sales leaders have failed to move the needle much. Both regions together make up only 25% of revenue with the rest in the USA. Sales team in Australia has been a revolving door. HR – Basically AWOL.

Viewing 1 - 3 of 116 Reviews

Glassdoor has 120 Integrated Research reviews submitted anonymously by Integrated Research employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if Integrated Research is right for you.