In my experience, visibility and time spent in office mattered more than actual impact or quality of work. Younger employees are expected to adjust to rigid hierarchy instead of being developed. Management trainee allocations often felt random and disconnected from actual skills or interests. Ownership is limited, decision-making is slow, and bureaucracy kills initiative very quickly.
The company officially promotes flexibility and hybrid work, but in practice it often depends entirely on manager attitude. Even during genuine personal emergencies or situations like extreme Mumbai rains, there was very little flexibility shown in some cases. Employees could be made to feel guilty for taking leave or prioritizing personal responsibilities.
I personally found it frustrating that initiative and output mattered less than physical presence and optics. Younger employees are frequently criticized instead of mentored, and there is a noticeable gap between how senior executives are treated versus how junior employees experience the organization. Concerns raised by employees often do not lead to meaningful action.
The company may work well for people looking primarily for stability and a long-term institutional career, but for younger professionals seeking learning velocity, meritocracy, innovation, or empowerment, it can feel extremely limiting.
