Disappointing and concerning... - Sales Executive Petrosoft Employee Review

Starting at Petrosoft was essentially my first professional role in a new market, and from the outset, the company demonstrated a remarkable ability to identify and cultivate talent. Realizing that I had experience with a particular CCaaS technology, I was immediately tasked with researching and managing vendors, a role I had experience with, but was well outside the scope of the basic role I was hired to do. Throughout the process, I felt supported and had the chance to work autonomously with the Directors of other departments. One of the most rewarding aspects of my time at Petrosoft was the opportunity to help shape and develop a new department. This experience allowed me to collaborate with various teams, fostering a culture of cross-functional communication and problem-solving. The company’s genuine openness to new ideas — and its willingness to act on them — made me feel that my contributions were valued, motivating me to drive meaningful improvements and strategic initiatives. Another distinguishing factor is Petrosoft’s approach to hiring. The company often sources talent from unconventional backgrounds, which creates a uniquely diverse and dynamic team. The range of perspectives and problem-solving styles adds a creative energy to the workplace and encourages innovative thinking. I would strongly recommend Petrosoft to any ambitious professional seeking a dynamic and growth-oriented work environment. The opportunity to take on real business challenges, work with talented colleagues, and contribute in a meaningful way makes Petrosoft an excellent place to build a rewarding career.

One area where Petrosoft could enhance the employee experience is through more structured performance reviews and rewards. Regularly assessing employee contributions and aligning compensation with the full scope of responsibilities would further motivate high performance and reinforce the company’s exciting startup atmosphere.

The only reason Petrosoft continues functioning is because of the employees below the executive level. There are genuinely talented, hardworking people throughout the company who care deeply about customers and each other. Many employees stay far longer than they should out of loyalty to coworkers, not leadership. I worked with many excellent people there and would gladly work with them again in a healthier environment.

Petrosoft is one of the clearest examples of how nepotism, ego, and outdated leadership can slowly hollow out a company from the inside. Under Sergei Gorlov's leadership, the company has become an organization where family loyalty appears to matter more than expertise, accountability, or operational competence. Multiple members of the owner's family have rotated through leadership positions across departments while experienced employees outside that circle were expected to absorb the consequences of failed decisions. The software itself still relies heavily on aging architecture that leadership has failed to meaningfully modernize despite years of warning signs. Instead of addressing foundational technical problems, leadership appears more focused on optics, sales numbers, and attracting investors while the actual customer experience and operational stability continue deteriorating. One thing Petrosoft does exceptionally well is organizational complexity. In addition to the various Petrosoft entities, SG entities, management entities, energy entities, and real estate entities, there appears to be an endless supply of organizational charts, reporting structures, and leadership arrangements that somehow all lead back to the same handful of people. It's actually impressive. Most companies spend decades trying to distribute authority and accountability throughout an organization. Petrosoft appears to have solved that problem by concentrating both almost entirely within one family. The company also suffers from a severe accountability problem. When strategies fail, responsibility rarely moves upward. Executives simply shift roles, departments, or priorities while rank-and-file employees are left managing the fallout. Competent employees are frequently ignored while underqualified leadership continues making expensive mistakes without consequences. I personally witnessed leadership prioritize appearances over operational reality in ways that made me deeply uncomfortable. When concerns were raised internally about financially unsustainable decisions and obvious losses, the response was not to investigate or improve the strategy—it was to isolate and marginalize employees who questioned it. The culture of retaliation is real. Once you are viewed as "not fully on board," communication dries up, meetings happen without you, and your ability to effectively do your job becomes increasingly difficult. Internal complaint processes appeared performative in my experience. Concerns raised through proper channels were effectively ignored for nearly a year before I was eventually laid off by some of the same people I trusted to address those concerns professionally. The physical office conditions reflected the broader dysfunction of the company. Serious facility issues—including a long-running wildlife infestation that employees regularly discussed—remained unresolved for extended periods while leadership largely removed themselves from the environment instead of fixing the problems employees were still expected to work around every day. What makes all of this frustrating is that Petrosoft could likely still be a strong company if leadership genuinely trusted experienced employees, modernized both the technology and workplace culture, and stopped treating criticism as disloyalty. In fact, after four years there, my strongest conclusion is this: The company would probably be more successful tomorrow if the executive suite disappeared and the employees already doing the work were simply allowed to run it.