Financial Times Employee Reviews about "senior management"

Updated 1 Sep 2020

To filter reviews, or .
4.1
80%
Recommend to a Friend
97%
Approve of CEO
Financial Times CEO John Ridding
John Ridding
159 Ratings
Pros
Cons
  • "career progression difficult, salaries could be improved(in 23 reviews)

  • "Senior management seem focused on money and self and don't seem to care for the staff (team dependant but not uncommon across many departments)(in 12 reviews)

More Pros and Cons
Pros & Cons are excerpts from user reviews. They are not authored by Glassdoor.

Reviews about "senior management"

Return to all Reviews
  1. "Good brand but challenging leadership"

    3.0
    • Work/Life Balance
    • Culture & Values
    • Career Opportunities
    • Compensation and Benefits
    • Senior Management
    Former Employee - Anonymous Employee in London, England
    Doesn't Recommend
    Neutral Outlook

    I worked at Financial Times full-time for more than 3 years

    Pros

    Strong brand with a good external reputation Excellent journalism Culture can be fun depending on the team you're in

    Cons

    Hard to have career progress Senior management seem focused on money and self and don't seem to care for the staff (team dependant but not uncommon across many departments)

  2. Helpful (2)

    "Disappointing from a people point of view, great from a learning point of view"

    3.0
    • Work/Life Balance
    • Culture & Values
    • Career Opportunities
    • Compensation and Benefits
    • Senior Management
    Former Employee - Anonymous in Southwark, England
    Recommends
    Negative Outlook
    No Opinion of CEO

    I worked at Financial Times full-time for more than a year

    Pros

    Flexible working hours, the bonus is ok. I personally formed great friendships with my colleagues. Very chill environment providing you avoid the politics. I still would recommend this place but keep your time there short.

    Cons

    Despite strong efforts around the business, the culture is rooted in celebrating bullies and rewarding men even if their behavior is offensive. Boys club culture is ignored by senior management when reported. If your colleague makes tasteless sexist or racially aggravated comments most chances are that he will get promoted.

    Continue reading

  3. Helpful (4)

    "Antiquated culture and content at How To Spend It"

    1.0
    • Work/Life Balance
    • Culture & Values
    • Career Opportunities
    • Compensation and Benefits
    • Senior Management
     
    Doesn't Recommend
    Neutral Outlook
    No Opinion of CEO

    I worked at Financial Times

    Pros

    FT brand is fantastic, fair salary and perks, wider company culture is very positive

    Cons

    Horrible working conditions at How To Spend It, which have been allowed by management to persist for years. Staff have consistently raised their concerns with HR and then being bullied out of their jobs. The content itself is repellent, boring and totally out of sync with what the FT claims to stand for. Anyone with a genuine interest in journalism should avoid – the magazine is essentially solely advertorial (picture choices and entire features are often solely determined by FT advertisers). FT senior management need to consider whether the cash a publication like this brings in justifies the long-term damage being done to its brand. Working hours are long, with overtime expected. Workflow is so badly organised that tasks take double the time they should. Content often has to be reworked several times by the senior team or editor, who are so busy that this could mean a hold-up of a couple of days. The editor micromanages the magazine to an unsustainable degree. There is a culture of fear within the office, as the rules change constantly. Staff are shouted at and humiliated in the office on a day-to-day basis, and turnover is the highest I have ever experienced. The editor's frequent last-minute changes to issues and constant shouting create a frantic atmosphere, raising staff stress levels with subsequent long-lasting impacts on health and mental health.

    Continue reading
  4. Helpful (4)

    "Could be better.."

    3.0
    • Work/Life Balance
    • Culture & Values
    • Career Opportunities
    • Compensation and Benefits
    • Senior Management
    Current Employee - Anonymous Employee in London, England
    Recommends
    Positive Outlook
    Approves of CEO

    I have been working at Financial Times full-time

    Pros

    - Good brand name - Free FT subscription + discounts in local shops/cafes + gym subsidy - Central London location - Some really lovely people and bright young things - A personal development team providing workshops and training courses

    Cons

    - Management could be better if bottom line wasn't the main focus all the time - Great employees are leaving due to lack of pay rises, creating hostile environment - The same people are praised again and again - Younger staff and female staff often overlooked for promotions - Management have odd company competition which only rewards those from certain teams (giving others reasons to feel demotivated) - A lot of people concerned about diversity but seeing no changes despite voicing these concerns to senior management (who are all white and mostly male) - Canteen food is poor quality and expensive

    Continue reading
  5. Helpful (16)

    "Gridlock, gatekeepers and demotivating situations on daily basis"

    2.0
    • Work/Life Balance
    • Culture & Values
    • Career Opportunities
    • Compensation and Benefits
    • Senior Management
    Developer in London, England
    Recommends
    Negative Outlook
    Approves of CEO

    I have been working at Financial Times for more than 3 years

    Pros

    - Good life and work and balance, typical 9-5 job, working from home is OK - 30 days holidays after 2 years - Great recognisable brand to work for, everyone knows the FT, everyone respects it - You will have a good linkedin profile thanks to the FT, other companies will be trying to pinch you on daily basis - Some people who work for the FT are great! Everyone is friendly, most of them are genuine, some of them are very interesting pasionate people you enjoy spending time with - Great tradition of an impartial news organisation with the highest journalistic standards in the world, I am proud be part of the FT, but....

    Cons

    - The salaries are below the market rate and noone is doing anything to improve the situation, most of the talented people leave after few years, then FT is left with the average demotivated dead woods of uncreative people trying to remain in their jobs and only aim to became a middle managera, than new creative people come on board and are blocked by the little middle managers again... the process repeats every few years - Development takes ages, there is always a good excuse why the things can not be done better 'we are not Bloomberg' 'we are not WSJ' there is always some sort of excuse, all the good ideas have to be disolved because they are too risky for the people who only care about their pensions - You are forced to have meetings about meetings wasting everyones time causing irritation and making everyone cry inside - Entire business model is exceptionally bad, the only reason why the company did not fail is the super strong brand, there is a constant conflict between printed paper/advertising, B2C and B2B, there is no integration at all, the Banker sub should cost £20k per company by they still send PDFs of the magazine that is forwarded to thousands of people - There is no internal communication and there is no spirit of 'lets do it together' - Subs are to cheap and the biggest companies are paying too little - Typical call centre mentality across the whole commercial team, selling subscriptions as a comodity, and call centre type of customer service, very little focus on relationship building with the people who value the content - Layers and layers of totally pointless middle management, people with very little knowledge get promoted, and those who want to grow the FT are sean as a fear to their little managment positions, thats why all the good people leave after getting totally demotivated - Senior management does not like to speak with the people lower than themselves at all, they prefer pointless dashbords with even more poinless information there - All the interesting development ideas have been disolved, put on hold and later rejected

    Continue reading
  6. Helpful (3)

    "Nice Brand - the reason Nikkei paid cash to own it."

    3.0
    • Work/Life Balance
    • Culture & Values
    • Compensation and Benefits
    • Senior Management
    Current Employee - Freelancer in London, England
    Recommends
    Positive Outlook

    I have been working at Financial Times full-time for more than 3 years

    Pros

    a). You get the band's 'label' on your resume/cv. b). You get to meet fantastic & smart colleagues who take ownership of ideas - and make something out of it. c). If you are good at what you do, you get ample time to learn new stuffs and either switch roles or capture the interest of management. d). Good at office politics?, Yes? then you will find the FT a good fit. e). Lazy type? - i.e can't be bothered about other facets of the business(my role and my role only), the FT will accommodate you. Caveat - you will find that you have to keep up at some point. f). Generally, the FT is a 'very good ladder' to career progression.

    Cons

    a) Remuneration: the FT feign not knowing this is an issue. As an employee you either make a compelling case(plus being good at office politics) to get close to market value or you look outwards. Good guys eventually leave! b). The mid level & senior management are striving hard to better their lot. I tell you, they have less time to cater to team members' welfare. To get their interest(especially if you are good), give them a hint of how the pasture is greener outside and be VERY SERIOUS about it. You may ask why be so serious - i tell you it drives home your point. c). Complacency: some long term staff are either knowingly or otherwise waiting for that severance pay check.

    Continue reading
  7. Helpful (1)

    "Too many office politics"

    2.0
    • Work/Life Balance
    • Culture & Values
    • Career Opportunities
    • Compensation and Benefits
    • Senior Management
    Head of Department in London, England
    Doesn't Recommend
    Positive Outlook
    Disapproves of CEO

    I have been working at Financial Times

    Pros

    Premium Brand, very clever people to work with, excellent office location in central London

    Cons

    Too many office politics and too many layers of management. No carrier prospects, as there is a group of very tenured people which include senior management who are just waiting for the retirement date. All they do is to "protect" their job and create work for themselves and their teams. Senior management do not talk to each other and there are lots of political games played amongst them. You will find that there are teams within teams who do not work together at all but they politically fight each other. Technology is very antiquate and it takes forever to implement system changes. Lack of direction as change is implemented on a daily basis and no time is given to employees to adapt, as such, lots of different initiatives are implemented but hardly ever any are completed. L&D is totally inexistent despite FT is part of Pearson.

    Continue reading
  8. Helpful (4)

    "Premium brand, average company."

    3.0
    • Work/Life Balance
    • Culture & Values
    • Career Opportunities
    • Compensation and Benefits
    • Senior Management
    Former Employee -  
    Doesn't Recommend
    Neutral Outlook
    Approves of CEO

    I worked at Financial Times full-time for more than 3 years

    Pros

    Some great people to work with and a generous holiday allowance. Whenever I brought up the fact that I worked for the FT in conversation it was always something that impressed people. Superb location on the Thames and a lot of the staff bonded together really well.

    Cons

    The FT is a highly political company and if you are unwilling or unable to "play the game" you will get no where on the progression ladder. There is a layer of middle management desperately trying to justify their jobs and in doing so, block communication going up or down. The amount of reporting tools and meetings that are employed are total overkill and serve little purpose other than to help maintain the image that certain managers are busy. From my personal experience merit and hardworking was not always rewarded and fresh ideas were either dismissed as a threat to preserving the status quo or "borrowed" by others who passed them off as their own. Similarly, the blame for failed initiatives was often shifted onto those who were expendable. The company could be so much more efficient and dynamic if the dead wood were to be stripped out. I believe the senior management are unaware of a lot of the necessary changes needed and assume all to be ok.

    Continue reading
  9. Helpful (2)

    "Great brand on your CV, but don't expect anything more than that..."

    3.0
    • Work/Life Balance
    • Culture & Values
    • Career Opportunities
    • Compensation and Benefits
    • Senior Management
     
    Doesn't Recommend
    Neutral Outlook
    Approves of CEO

    I worked at Financial Times

    Pros

    - If you're in Advertising, the people are great. Friendly, lively and social atmosphere to be in - Great brand to work for, raises eyebrows in any conversation if you say you work for the FT - Good benefits

    Cons

    - Poor compensation, below industry standard - Zero potential for progression unless you are chummy with Management - Employee development doesn't exist for individuals, which leads to high turnover of talented staff - Training schemes to develop any new skills take extremely long to get on - Micro-managing by some Managers - Office politics everywhere, particularly with senior management

    Continue reading
  10. Helpful (4)

    "Bureaucratic and corporate - avoid if you want to feel valued!"

    1.0
    • Work/Life Balance
    • Culture & Values
    • Career Opportunities
    • Compensation and Benefits
    • Senior Management
    Former Employee - B2B Sales Executive in London, England
    Doesn't Recommend
    Neutral Outlook
    Approves of CEO

    I worked at Financial Times full-time for more than a year

    Pros

    Office location in central London is good. Flexible working culture. Strong brand and market position. Company has a clear strategy for future development.

    Cons

    Individual achievements aren't recognised. Too many initiatives from senior management - have little or no impact on the day-to-day running of the business and just drain employee's valuable time. Difficult to raise issues and concerns with management. Too many layers of management - inefficient business model. Lots of cliques, making it hard to fit in as a new employee. I was made to feel unwelcome by many! Poor personal/career development opportunities. Only a select few are favoured by the middle and senior managers, so I was constantly overlooked for international travel and progression (which I attribute to my refusal to get involved in office politics). High staff turnover. Too much back office work is outsourced, which causes too many problems.

    Continue reading
Viewing 1 - 10 of 12 English Reviews