Pros
The company culture is aimed at caring for its associates and strives to be a morally and ethically sound company. They make their best efforts to care about people, although misguided, the intent is in the right place. Great examples are an internal learning and development program, associate resource groups, and functions to build relationships beyond just business transactions. These programs are not executed very effectively, but there are time and resources behind them that show the commitment. The leadership really does care about pets and wants to improve the quality of life for animals. Great philanthropic contributions that could get significantly more attention from the consumer world. There is PetSmart Charities which commits a significant amount of resources to saving pets lives, disaster relief, spay/neuter clinics and more. Beyond that PetSmart contributes to United Way, an internal associate assistance foundation, and other great charitable causes. When you see these public displays and the general reaction from consumers it gives you pride to work at PetSmart. Ultimately the people who work for this company are caring, compassionate people, who do the right thing. They generally hire great culture fits that share these principles and commitment.
Cons
PetSmart does many great things for people and pets, and they hire people who want to do that as well. Unfortunately, it does not consistently coincide with talent or applicable skillsets to deliver those functions. The company is very incestuous from a hiring perspective, meaning that people routinely move within roles internally that they lack the skills to perform. The intent is to allow associates to grow and learn new roles, which is amazing; however, the end result is having many people incapable of performing job functions. Potential examples would be customer facing technology managers who are unaware of the differences between Google Chrome and Internet Explorer, or store operations leaders who have no history in operating retail stores. Many PetSmart associates have been there for a significant tenure. This is a testament to how well they aim to treat their people, but it can also demonstrate the complacency. Associates are inclined to stay in their role without developing new skills or improving within that role and it is considered acceptable. There is limited technical or professional talent, but rather significant experience. While both have value, the lack of hard skills is evident in routinely failed execution, poor planning, and an overall lack of strategy. The limited high level talent in PetSmart is routinely on a brief rotation where they can quickly climb and then depart to a place that allows them to work with other top talent compared to a more tenure driven bureaucracy that exists at PetSmart. The company strives to have great stores and provide incredible service, but the tools and guidance that are put in place do not coincide with those goals. Overall the company lacks progressive thought and is intent on continually trying to execute the same strategies over and over. They are very antiquated from a technology perspective and do not understand the modern shopping environment or a younger consumer. This is evident when you go into a PetSmart compared to other specialty retailers or competitors. The organization is very top heavy and it results in many VPs, Directors, and Managers who lack specific skillsets beyond "being a leader." The leadership skillset is challenging to come to fruition because often leaders may only have 0, 1, or 2 direct reports. This results in less leadership and attempting to do more task driven work while supervising the tasks of a teammate. The output is many meetings to discuss meetings and overarching thoughts or philosophies on things that could be done. It lacks enough people to actually plan, implement, execute, and deliver results. Senior leadership has had nearly 100% turnover in the last 24 months which should be eye-opening and help explain some of the challenges with strategic direction. There is talent among the senior leadership ranks, but no clear leader. This shows in a constantly changing and reactionary company strategy instead of a consistent and evolving strategy.
