Forsys Reviews

Compensation is low when compared to others.

If you are allocated to a project, there is constant uncertainty about how long you will remain there. If you are on the bench, you are essentially counting your days. Job security feels extremely unstable. The company appears to be run primarily by HR, with minimal involvement from the delivery or technical leadership in critical decisions. Layoff decisions are reportedly taken by HR without meaningful consultation with the delivery team or performance evaluation from project stakeholders. There seems to be no transparency, empathy, or structured communication in such decisions. Salary-related concerns are a major issue. There have been instances where salaries were deducted without prior communication or clear explanation. When employees seek clarification, they often do not receive proper justification. There are frequent salary delays, and explanations such as “US bank holidays” are cited, which reflects poor payroll planning and risk mitigation. For an organization employing experienced professionals, this reasoning does not inspire confidence in financial or operational management. The company advertises a 20% variable/bonus component in the CTC, but in reality, employees reportedly receive only 2–3% of that amount. Bonus letters are issued in April stating that payment will be made after six months, which raises questions about the intent and structure of the variable pay model. The lack of clarity and consistency in compensation policies impacts trust significantly. Work-from-home requests are rarely approved, even when justified. Employees are expected to be present in the office five days a week, and WFH often results in Leave Without Pay (LOP), creating unnecessary rigidity and dissatisfaction. Projects are typically short-term (4–5 months) with aggressive timelines. Client expectations are often not met, and there appears to be a disconnect between the marketing/sales commitments and the actual delivery capabilities. This misalignment puts additional pressure on delivery teams. There is significant micromanagement at multiple levels. Senior leadership frequently appears more focused on protecting their own roles rather than addressing structural issues. Feedback mechanisms exist in form, but not always in spirit—concerns are heard but rarely acted upon. Blame culture seems prevalent, with responsibility often shifted downward instead of being owned at leadership levels. Several senior or C-level roles appear misaligned with organizational needs, creating bureaucracy without adding measurable value. Even KRAs for technical teams are sometimes defined by HR without alignment to actual technical responsibilities, leading to unrealistic or irrelevant performance expectations. Basic workplace facilities also reflect cost-cutting measures—for example, air conditioning being turned off for extended periods, and employee concerns being ignored. These small but important aspects affect morale and overall workplace experience. Overall, the organization lacks transparency, financial clarity, employee empathy, and strategic alignment between sales, delivery, and leadership. While this summary only highlights key issues, there are many more concerns that could fill an entire book. Consider this a glimpse into the employee experience.