Pros
Nice office only. nothing else
Cons
Micromanaged day-to-day work while providing limited strategic direction. Nearly no project planning and lacked structure, priorities changed frequently, and work was often assigned ad hoc rather than through a logical sprint planning process. This leds to confusion, reduced productivity, and avoidable production issues. Expectations around delivery timelines were often unrealistic. For example, new work or major discussions could take place late on a Friday, with requests for significant progress updates by Monday, leaving little time for thoughtful implementation or problem-solving. Tasks were frequently assigned with only high-level or vague requirements, requiring developers to spend considerable time clarifying objectives. Suggestions to improve planning, delivery processes, or engineering practices were rarely adopted, making it difficult to address recurring issues or improve team efficiency. In short, the engineering organisation lacked a clear long-term technical vision and roadmap for its systems and infrastructure. As a result, engineering effort was largely reactive rather than strategic. Instead of investing in improving platform stability, modernising infrastructure, reducing technical debt, or implementing preventative engineering practices, the team was primarily focused on addressing immediate operational issues. This led to recurring production incidents, frequent interruptions to planned work, and an environment where the same underlying problems continued to reappear.