HyperionDev reviews about "management"

Can be hard to get approval for new budget and offices recently downsized

Poor communication from CEO Fake good reviews from new members Managers are push overs due to CEO CEO can change remote work based on his mood

they have people willing to train the new people but arent considered probation reviews arent done properly or lack of a better word arent done at all and this takes away from doing what is expected of you.

My time at this organisation was defined by disorganisation, poor leadership, and practices that I believe raise serious ethical and professional concerns. These include: - Unstable leadership and a lack of direction: Line managers often changed or were unclear on strategy. Company priorities shifted week to week, with no structured plan. Morale often hinged on senior leaders’ mood or internal politics. Communication was poor, and major changes affecting staff were often sprung without warning or proper explanation. - Unrealistic expectations and reactive decision-making: Targets were regularly changed mid-quarter, and employees were expected to adapt to constantly shifting goals without extra resources or clarity. Success was often defined retroactively to suit whatever had been delivered. - Questionable practices around reviews and reputation management: During my time there, staff were strongly encouraged to post positive reviews online, including on Glassdoor, in an apparent effort to counter negative feedback. Students were incentivised to leave five-star reviews in exchange for vouchers, with the reward explicitly tied to review positivity. This raised significant concerns about transparency and authenticity. - Serious concerns around student treatment and government-funded courses: Students studying through Department for Education-funded programmes were, in some cases, threatened with debt recovery for fees that were supposed to be covered. In at least one known situation, students were asked to pay thousands of pounds - despite initially being told their course was fully funded. There were also instances where post-signature alterations to student agreements were made to shift financial liability, which caused considerable distress. - Culture of silence and retaliation: Attempts to raise ethical concerns internally - including uncomfortable partner interactions and document handling - were either ignored or brushed aside. One employee shared their discomfort after being asked to edit a document post-signature to address a client-side issue, without appropriate legal or compliance oversight. These types of incidents created an environment where employees were fearful of speaking up. - Lack of genuine employee care: Mental health and burnout were not taken seriously. Concerns were often met with dismissive remarks or redirected blame. The workload was heavy, the atmosphere tense, and genuine support systems were lacking. Overall, the internal culture was deeply misaligned with the public-facing mission. The company appeared focused more on external optics than meaningful reform.

High workload at time but new traffic management in team is improving thing Many iterations of feedback on design

Toxic work environment where you're constantly looking over your shoulder. Management leads with fear — definitely more of a ‘stick’ than a ‘carrot’ approach. Decision-making is paralysed because everyone is afraid of the CEO, so progress stalls and accountability is non-existent. It’s not a place for growth — more like where careers go to die. Avoid if you value your mental health and professional development.

Rough start to the project. But that has improved.

Fast-paced: This is a scale-up environment. Things change quickly (processes, cohorts, pricing), so you need to be adaptable. It is not a place for someone who wants to coast. High Expectations: It is a sales role, so targets are ambitious. You need to stay on top of your numbers.