Cyberlab Reviews

Essentially still Chess ICT with a rebrand so focus has not shifted

Disappointing commission scheme: The commission structure was not competitive, and key performance indicators (KPIs) were frequently changed, often designed in ways that made it difficult to achieve full commission. This made it hard to stay motivated, as extra effort wasn't adequately rewarded. Lack of direction: Management frequently shifted goals and strategies, creating confusion and frustration. There would be a new excel to work on every week about a new vendor initiative. Poor technical knowledge: The company has deep knowledge of specific vendors but lacks a broader understanding of cybersecurity strategy. Account directors are often left to fill strategic gaps by relying heavily on vendors, rather than taking a consultative, customer/Security-first approach. Salary transparency issues: Base salary was tied to targets, and these targets were shared openly within the team, meaning everyone knew each other's pay. This led to unnecessary tension and unrest within the sales team. Vendor limitations: Many of the vendors Cyber Lab works with are not best of breed, making it challenging to sell into larger, more mature enterprises that expect top-tier solutions. Impact of acquisitions: The company’s growth through acquisitions has led to a fragmented business structure, making it difficult to integrate and sell new products effectively.