Charitable Impact Reviews

There are too many silos within the teams. In the 14 months, I was there; there was little collaboration between teams. Departments, especially Design, worked within silos keeping work secretive and opaque. There was little to no feedback in 14 months. They implemented a quarterly feedback system, but despite investing time and effort into it, my managers did nothing with it. As I alluded to in the title, CHIMP is an excellent place for specific roles. CSM, Marketing, Finance If you're in Customer Succes, Marketing or Finance CHIMP might be an excellent place for you. Design For Design, I think it would depend on what you want from a team and the experience. If you want to work with a cross-functional team and collaborate with Product, Engineering and other groups this might not be for you. If your goal is to work with a high performing Design team and want to spend the majority of your time working with other designers, then this might be the right team for you. Product & Engineering For Product and Engineering (in Vancouver), I would avoid CHIMP. At the time I left there was no clear vision for Product or Engineering within the Vancouver office. Leadership are focused on a more waterfall approach to product development. Most of the product and engineering team is in India, so there's a 12-hour timezone challenge.

While the company projects an outward image of positivity and professes to be aligned with strong values, the internal reality paints a starkly different picture. The company seems to prioritize its external image over the internal well-being of its employees. The dissonance between the external facade and internal reality creates an environment that is the opposite of a positive and fulfilling work experience. In numerous companies, internal issues often take a backseat when positive results are achieved. However, in this context, achieving goals and targets—excluding significant donations directly managed by the CEO and a select few—is a non-occurrence. A prevailing sentiment within the organization centers on the perceived insignificance of annual and quarterly planning, as targets consistently elude attainment without any consequences. When performance shortcomings are exposed, senior leaders frequently avoid responsibility by introducing distractions. Finger-pointing is a common practice here, often accompanied by phrases like "It is their fault" or "These people need to go." Yet, even after the departure of those deemed to be "holding the company back," no change occurs. At some juncture, introspection becomes imperative, and its time to look in the mirror; it's not them, it's you. A piece of advice for new hires: it's only a matter of time before fingers are pointed at you, so ensure you network and have alternative options. During my time here, I witnessed a series of troubling incidents that had a profound impact on the workplace atmosphere. Instances of gaslighting, bullying, intimidation, and inappropriate behaviour by a senior leader and their close associate. These were not isolated occurrences but indicative of a broader systemic issue within the company that permitted these individuals to engage in conduct that can be characterized as malicious. These issues extend beyond creating an uncomfortable work environment—they have led to significant psychological distress, fostering an atmosphere saturated with depression and burnout among employees. Despite repeated attempts to elevate concerns and diligent documentation and reporting of these issues to the Human Resources department, the CEO's response was unfortunately muted. Either he chose not to address these issues or found himself unable to muster the courage to confront them head-on. I harbor no animosity towards the CEO; rather, I feel sadness for him, recognizing that he appears powerless and easily influenced, and triangulated by senior leaders.