What is the company culture like at Reach Strategies?

Healthcare benefits are solid. The only real positive was the people I met—many of whom had similar negative experiences. A number of us have stayed connected afterward and support each other, which says a lot about what it was like to work there.

Leadership culture is deeply problematic. Employee concerns are often dismissed or reframed in ways that feel like gaslighting. Comments from leadership can make you question your own judgment, even when the issues are obvious. Extremely high turnover. I personally counted well over a dozen employees who either left or were let go within a relatively short window. That level of churn is not normal and should be a red flag to anyone considering joining. Performance management is disorganized and inconsistent. Expectations shift, documentation is sloppy, and processes lack transparency. Micromanagement is intense—down to tracking time in small increments—which creates a culture of surveillance rather than trust. Workflows are chaotic. Feedback and edits are scattered across multiple platforms (Google Docs, Slack, etc.), making it difficult to keep track of direction or priorities. There is a pattern of overpromising in proposals and expecting teams to deliver work that isn’t realistically scoped or resourced. Decision-making is highly top-down. Senior leadership sets direction but pushes execution challenges onto middle managers and staff without adequate support. The environment is stressful to the point of being unhealthy. I experienced significant physical effects from the stress, which ultimately led me to leave.

The individual contributors at REACH are genuinely kind and hard-working people who are always helping each other out. Similarly, most of the clients are the same way. My client interactions were always pleasant and collaborative, which was my primary motivation to do the best work. The entirely remote/WFH operations saves commute time.

When first starting at REACH, there seems to be an agreement among management, to constantly praise your efforts. It's evident that some people really love this eerie period of time, because it's done to every single new hire. Every single thing you do will be perfect. You'll be reminded to take your breaks, not to check your email after hours or on the weekends, and to let them know if you "need anything at all." After it is believed that your trust is gained, the behavior completely changes. The amount of negative reviews should alarm you and you might doubt the authenticity (we all did at first). But notice how specific and consistent the negative reviews are, while the positive reviews are vague, contain little detail, and their Cons section are just copout responses. When a negative review is posted, current employees are encouraged to cover them up under the guise of “we’d love to hear more thoughts about working here.” Over the past year, over a dozen employees have been terminated without reasons specified besides “fit”. With team members constantly being fired, morale understandably stays low year-round. Everyone is basically working with the thought that they could be next. It’s as if management shoots a hostage periodically, to remind the rest of the hostages what can happen if they don't fall in line. If I mention all the cons, I’d hit the character limit, so here are my observations of three major issues at REACH, with examples: Project Management and Performance Expectations It's true what others have said about project tracking. Management has an unhealthy obsession with Asana and tracking projects. You'll be told to create Asana tasks for mundane actions like responding to emails or deleting files. Projects are assigned in Asana, but are updated in every other platform you could think of. Each Asana task also contains an arbitrary due date. These due dates are continually missed because every deliverable goes through 3-4 rounds of internal review. There are periods of time where the CEO absolutely must review everything that's about to be delivered to a client. I've intentionally left errors on my work to be reviewed. They've come back as-is, claiming to have been reviewed. Regardless of roadblocks, your deadlines are strictly enforced. But you'll wait for weeks when you assign management a task. Most projects are assigned without guidance, or examples of what “good” looks like, Your work is unacceptable if it wasn’t done exactly how management would have done it. You can ask for help, sure. But receiving more lackluster guidance, delivered with a negative attitude, is not worth it. I once asked for clarification on a project, and was responded to with an employee counseling notice where I was told that since I “asked for help,” it was “obvious that I had not started on it.” Working Hours and (Lack of) Flexibility Salaried WFH roles typically come with some flexibility. But unfortunately, many of those benefits do not exist here. At REACH, your time is tracked daily down to 15-minute blocks, which is claimed to be for billing clients. During your weekly 1:1 with your manager, you have to explain why tasks took a certain amount of hours and how your calendar has scheduling gaps. It’s hard to take half an hour to run an errand, or even eat lunch, during the day. And if you don’t answer your Slack or emails promptly, you’ll receive an earful. My questions to management on Slack were ignored frequently. I had to visit the DMV on a Friday afternoon and it was counted as 2 hours of PTO. The employee handbook even explicitly states that performing child-care activities during work hours is prohibited. During an internal meeting, the CEO was caught doing some personal shopping, when a cashier asked him if needed a bag for 10 cents. The subject was quickly changed and this was never addressed. I'm sure he tracked it in his timesheet though. Management Behavior and Hypocritical Orders I was frequently asked if I had started projects that I was already working on. “Did you see that email?” is a common question, minutes after an email hits your inbox. I’ve been asked about specific colleagues and if it “really takes that long” for them to do their job. At one point, I was told to share my screen to prove that I had been working because my “calendar looked empty.” Honestly, no one can fully avoid micromanagement tendencies (myself included). If it happens infrequently and it’s addressed, completely fine with me. Great managers have no problem acknowledging their own flaws.. Unfortunately, I never witnessed that self-assessment at REACH. And speaking of self-assessment, mandatory weekly “Pulse Checks” make you rate your weekly performance with a percentage. Management claims that the purpose was to give your manager feedback and be transparent about anything you need help with. The times I explicitly said that I needed some task guidance, and there was too much work assigned to me, resulted in my being written up, and terminated, respectively.

OK benefits, I have a great group of friends who no longer work there.

I typically refrain from writing reviews, but after my experience at Reach Strategies, I felt a moral obligation to warn others. Working here broke me. That’s not hyperbole. I was driven to seek professional counseling after enduring relentless micromanagement, a toxic culture, and a complete disregard for employee wellbeing. Management is narcissistic and paranoid, obsessed with control to the point of absurdity. They misuse tracking tools like Asana, Google, and Harvest—not for efficiency, but to scrutinize your work down to the quarter hour. Weekly “check-ins” feel more like interrogations. You're not treated like a professional, but rather like a pawn in their game of fear-based leadership. The turnover is catastrophic. In just one year, I counted 16 people who left. We now have a private LinkedIn group of 26 former employees—each with their own trauma story. If that doesn’t speak volumes, I don’t know what will. Their so-called “strategic recommendations” are laughable—cut-and-paste templates riddled with errors, often referencing past clients by mistake. Innovation is non-existent. Want to introduce A/B testing or SEO? Prepare for sarcasm and resistance. They say they’re forward-thinking, but it's all for show. And those recent glowing reviews you might read on Glassdoor? Don’t be fooled. They were incentivized by leadership. Manufactured praise doesn’t change the reality of burnout, gaslighting, and strategic stagnation. Worst of all, management seems blind to the political and economic landscape. Their rose-colored blog posts ignore federal shifts in EV policy that will almost certainly impact the sustainability of their business model. Unless they adapt—and fast—they’ll be obsolete.

Healthcare benefits are solid. The only real positive was the people I met—many of whom had similar negative experiences. A number of us have stayed connected afterward and support each other, which says a lot about what it was like to work there.

Leadership culture is deeply problematic. Employee concerns are often dismissed or reframed in ways that feel like gaslighting. Comments from leadership can make you question your own judgment, even when the issues are obvious. Extremely high turnover. I personally counted well over a dozen employees who either left or were let go within a relatively short window. That level of churn is not normal and should be a red flag to anyone considering joining. Performance management is disorganized and inconsistent. Expectations shift, documentation is sloppy, and processes lack transparency. Micromanagement is intense—down to tracking time in small increments—which creates a culture of surveillance rather than trust. Workflows are chaotic. Feedback and edits are scattered across multiple platforms (Google Docs, Slack, etc.), making it difficult to keep track of direction or priorities. There is a pattern of overpromising in proposals and expecting teams to deliver work that isn’t realistically scoped or resourced. Decision-making is highly top-down. Senior leadership sets direction but pushes execution challenges onto middle managers and staff without adequate support. The environment is stressful to the point of being unhealthy. I experienced significant physical effects from the stress, which ultimately led me to leave.

Good benefits / inexpensive health insurance

Toxic, narcissistic leadership will throw employees under the bus at every opportunity to make up for their own lack of accountability. No transparency between directors and ground level staff. No greater vision for organization. Loads of busy work including weekly “pulse checks”, work logging, and meetings that serve no purpose. Beware! Turnover at REACH is unparalleled. In the past two years nearly 20 people have come and gone. The company has 15 total employees, for reference. REACH Strategies will take your mental health to the brink. The CEO stalks former employees on LinkedIn. I finally had to block him.

Healthcare benefits are solid. The only real positive was the people I met—many of whom had similar negative experiences. A number of us have stayed connected afterward and support each other, which says a lot about what it was like to work there.

Leadership culture is deeply problematic. Employee concerns are often dismissed or reframed in ways that feel like gaslighting. Comments from leadership can make you question your own judgment, even when the issues are obvious. Extremely high turnover. I personally counted well over a dozen employees who either left or were let go within a relatively short window. That level of churn is not normal and should be a red flag to anyone considering joining. Performance management is disorganized and inconsistent. Expectations shift, documentation is sloppy, and processes lack transparency. Micromanagement is intense—down to tracking time in small increments—which creates a culture of surveillance rather than trust. Workflows are chaotic. Feedback and edits are scattered across multiple platforms (Google Docs, Slack, etc.), making it difficult to keep track of direction or priorities. There is a pattern of overpromising in proposals and expecting teams to deliver work that isn’t realistically scoped or resourced. Decision-making is highly top-down. Senior leadership sets direction but pushes execution challenges onto middle managers and staff without adequate support. The environment is stressful to the point of being unhealthy. I experienced significant physical effects from the stress, which ultimately led me to leave.

If you're someone with vision, creativity, and a genuine passion for clean energy and the EV movement—this is not the place for you. The only individuals truly thriving here are the top two executives, whose leadership style is as identical as it is antiquated. Their closed-minded approach stifles innovation and silences fresh ideas.

This company will not evolve because its greatest obstacle is at the helm. Constructive suggestions are not welcomed—they're punished. Speak up, and you’ll find yourself targeted, micromanaged, and pushed out under the guise of “not being able to handle it.” It’s not that people can’t handle the work—it’s that they can’t survive the culture. The pattern is undeniable. You’ll notice every negative review echoes the same themes—and that’s not a coincidence. Many former employees remain in touch, not out of nostalgia, but to process the shared trauma of having worked under such oppressive leadership. If you still choose to apply, God speed. And when the inevitable disillusionment hits, just know—there’s a whole alumni network of us out here who understand exactly what you’re going through.

I value quality work and I take pride in mine! I find myself challenged in the best way that has led to professional growth. I appreciate the transparency of not only business operations but also the work we collaborate on as a team. Accountability is a must to be successful at REACH which speaks to the level of professionalism the team holds. I've learned a lot about EVs and clean energy and will continue to learn in the future.

Some former employees lacked the strong work ethic needed to be accountable for their time and the quality of their work, leading to substandard deliverables. As a result, turnover at REACH can sometimes be high through no fault of the organization.

The cons surpass the benefits in impact.

Cons: Read the reviews before considering working here. Every one noting the toxic and dysfunctional environment is true. Those happy, great-place-to-work shorts on their interviewing page? Those were coerced. If your toxic boss asks you to write a review about how great a place it is and you still have a job there, you write it. Ask the company these questions: You say your core values as an organization include transparency, trust, empathy and kindness. 1. Why is your non-management employee turnover rate 90%+ for every year you've been in business? 2. Your site says 11 offices - isn't that just 9 employee homes and 2 storage locations? 3. Why do you stalk ex-employees? 4. Why do you keep a manager that has been unable to work with over 100+ people in the company's 13 year existence? 5. Why do you continue to blatantly ignore HR rules in meetings? 6. Why do you insist on using a weekly check-in method with no metrics to go by - it hinges on whether or not your manager “feels” like you deserve a certain percentage. And the most telling question of all: 7. Why have 75%+ of your ex-employees blocked you from all contact?

Passionate, exceptional colleagues that are now bonded by shared trauma

Everything else. I had to give myself a lot of space from my experience at REACH before coming here to leave a review - I wanted to ensure that I wasn't letting my emotions cloud my judgement. However, even with the space I've given myself (2+ yrs), the picture in my rear view is exactly the same as the day I left. The most intense micromanagement, devoid of real "teaching or leadership" I've ever experienced. Combined with phycological and emotional abuse around every corner. Ethics were questionable. I was so stressed that I couldn't sleep, my marriage was affected, and I ended up in therapy for the first time in my life. Let me also be clear that I am very familiar and comfortable working in a "start up" environment, and in a consulting firm. I am well versed in tracking my time and reporting against that with utilization targets assigned to my workload. My challenge was not my ability to "handle" the environment. My challenge was the the toxic, abusive, blame shifting culture that I was trying to make work. I am baffled at how they are still in business - honestly. I strongly advise against working at this company.