Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Companies Manipulate Glassdoor by Inflating Rankings and Pressuring Employees

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 500 posts

Re: Companies Manipulate Glassdoor by Inflating Rankings and Pressuring Employees

#481

Post by philpem »

whiskyant wrote: post #178
fuzz4lyfe wrote: post #32

I've had negative reviews flat out removed by a company that was paying glass door for some sort of premium service. I extensively reviewed the rules and reworded my comments and they were removed yet again. My points were fully factually true and were not anything too untoward (pay raises were promised to members of a new team, they never materialized, most team members left). For what it's worth, Path Forward IT is…

Blind is rapidly becoming the new glassdoor.

Blind? Sorry, never heard of it -- what is it?

Re: Companies Manipulate Glassdoor by Inflating Rankings and Pressuring Employees

#482

Post by ubertaco »

sevensor wrote: post #56
aerovistae wrote: post #16

You don't say! I used to work as an engineer at a truly awful little company, the worst I've been at, and when I left I gave them a scathing review. Not long after, several new reviews popped up. Here are some choice excerpts, get a load of this: > Pros: > For anyone reading these reviews, take it from someone who has been at this company for over 10 years, some people just like to use these review sites as a soundin…

Run from any prospective employer who tells you, "we're like a family." They mean it an all the worst ways. Feuding, dysfunction, racist uncles, getting kicked out of the house.

This can also often mean that they intend to try to replace your actual family in terms of how your hours each day are spent, which for many is unacceptable, no matter how shiny-happy-euphemistic "like a family" may sound.

Re: Companies Manipulate Glassdoor by Inflating Rankings and Pressuring Employees

#483

Post by ubertaco »

aerovistae wrote: post #16

You don't say! I used to work as an engineer at a truly awful little company, the worst I've been at, and when I left I gave them a scathing review. Not long after, several new reviews popped up. Here are some choice excerpts, get a load of this: > Pros: > For anyone reading these reviews, take it from someone who has been at this company for over 10 years, some people just like to use these review sites as a soundin…

Yeah, I left a negative review for a startup where I worked, and it was the first review (I actually had to create an entry for the startup in order to leave the review). I tried to be balanced about the things that attracted me there in the first place, and the kind of person who might be able to last a while there, but noted the downsides that drove me out.

Within a month, four more reviews, all 5-star reviews with "cons" sections like "none" or "I don't like this particular office snack" popped up for this company that had existed without reviews for years, all of which were very obviously in the unusual and quite-recognizable writing style of the head sales guy (who was constantly recruiting because of his habit of scapegoating his 3-or-4-person sales team when the company did poorly, and thus firing and replacing all of them), down to his particular mannerisms that I hadn't heard from anyone else (with the same wording appearing in multiple reviews).

I flagged these reviews as obviously by the same author, one who was an "executive" employee of the company, and that I was willing to provide samples to prove it. I've since re-flagged those reviews a few times before realizing that Glassdoor has no interest in responding.

Since then, it appears that the same guy has taken to requiring his new hires (of which he has many, due to his high churn rate from firing and replacing every single BDR/SDR regularly) to write at least one glowing review on Glassdoor, which has grossly inflated the company's score.

The lesson I learned from this experience was to skim positive reviews looking for dangerous euphemisms ("more than just a job" means "no work-life balance", "like a family" means "unprofessional (and often backstabbing) working relationships", "fast-paced" / "driven" / "high-performer" means again that no work-life balance exists) count the number of negative reviews as a health indicator, and read negative reviews looking for repeated themes to identify real problems.

For example, a smallish (50 or so people) company I considered in my last job hunt had several negative reviews that contained phrases like "CEO conducts a whisper campaign against employees he doesn't like", and "getting on the CEO's bad side is easy and damning", while positive reviews said things like "not everyone can adapt to our flat structure" or "it's not for everyone", or "if you can learn to fit in, it's great". That sent the clear signal: there is no real reporting chain, just the CEO's capriciousness, and the CEO plays favorites (or "unfavorites") arbitrarily and heavy-handedly. The verdict: avoid this company.

As with any source of user-submitted reviews online, you have to learn a certain degree of cynicism in order to arrive at an informed decision.

Re: Companies Manipulate Glassdoor by Inflating Rankings and Pressuring Employees

#484

Post by leetcrew »

tyfon wrote: post #359
throwawaymath wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hence my second paragraph, yes. You’d definitely be sued, and it would definitely be expensive. You might not lose.

If you are sued by someone and win in the US, do you not get your legal expenses covered by the entity suing you? Also, you can probably just set up the scraper and webpage in another country or something.

> If you are sued by someone and win in the US, do you not get your legal expenses covered by the entity suing you?

often yes, but you actually have to win the case first. the idea is that you run out of money and give up before you get there.

Re: Companies Manipulate Glassdoor by Inflating Rankings and Pressuring Employees

#485

Post by yoz-y »

Profan wrote: post #53
yoz-y wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But when the people left they changed their review to something awful no? I mean, in the long run such behavior should not work.

Consider that if they know when you wrote your review, they know which your review is, if you then change your review, that's a pretty blatant way of telling them exactly who you are, which might not go over well if they have any sway at all (or if they know someone who might be able to block your progress later).

I see. I suppose this is also a problem in small companies in which the reviews could be easily identified as well.

Re: Companies Manipulate Glassdoor by Inflating Rankings and Pressuring Employees

#486

Post by fuzz4lyfe »

walshemj wrote: post #375
wiz21c wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you're an employee, you're paid for the time you spend at work. The productivity is not part of the equation in the contract.

Technically for a salaried "professional" job your not normally on hourly pay.

I ask every time and most jobs will tell you that they expect a 40 hour week on salary, if we want to be minute per minute pedantic I'm leaving at 10am every Friday.

Re: Companies Manipulate Glassdoor by Inflating Rankings and Pressuring Employees

#487

Post by aerovistae »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #331
aerovistae wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> factual elements of the reviews What facts can you really share though? This isn't a court situation, where evidence is scrutinized and held up to rigorous standards. So what are you really expecting? Transcripts of conversations? Financial documents? I don't really understand what kind of "facts" you would be looking for. Reviews are all about "how was your subjective experience there." If the answer is "awful, th…

Because there is a big difference between "awful, the company treated me poorly" and something like "I got 4 consecutive quarters of positive reviews, including a bonus and a raise, but then when there was a change in management I was let go with the reason being 'poor performance'." Something like that would let me know the company is immature with respect to how it managed employee growth.

That's a great example of a specific factual incident!

But, A.) you don't know if these "facts" are true, so they shouldn't really add much weight, and B.) not all situations come down to something so specific and citable. Sometimes, people are just really obnoxious to be around, and they're rude and impatient and temperamental and it's a daily thing and that's all there is to it, and you can't really boil that down to such a nice clean sentence as in your example.

Re: Companies Manipulate Glassdoor by Inflating Rankings and Pressuring Employees

#488

Post by VRay »

mrhappyunhappy wrote: post #439
noir_lord wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I was a slightly less calm person I’d have already beaten the shit out of my partners boss, he is making her absolutely fucking miserable though his ineptness. I keep telling her to quit, we can live on my salary indefinitely while she finds another job but she won’t. What makes it doubly annoying is that she is conscientious and has a work ethic. I fucking hate it to be honest, you’d think by now large companies…

My wife was like this, staying at a job with a dipshit boss. I told her to quit because we could live on my income but she refused. She brought her stress home and it impacted our marriage for the worse. If I could go back in time I would work harder to convince her to quit. It takes 2 to make an employment relationship. The employee has just as much if not more power than employer. Personally, I can't put up with a…

Yeah, it's really rough. Most people just don't have a combination of confidence, stubbornness, willpower, and raw spite that allows them to uproot and seek out a better position for themselves.

I used to think that I could encourage and/or browbeat people into taking charge of their own destinies, but after years of a good 99.9% failure rate I'm not so sure any more. (For every 1000 downvotes/insults I eat on Reddit or elsewhere when I tell people to stop putting up with HR's BS, I get about 1-2 people who heed my advice and actually find a new job)

I think regular people just naturally can't fend for themselves, and maybe they need some form of protection..

Re: Companies Manipulate Glassdoor by Inflating Rankings and Pressuring Employees

#489

Post by TeMPOraL »

VRay wrote: post #488
mrhappyunhappy wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My wife was like this, staying at a job with a dipshit boss. I told her to quit because we could live on my income but she refused. She brought her stress home and it impacted our marriage for the worse. If I could go back in time I would work harder to convince her to quit. It takes 2 to make an employment relationship. The employee has just as much if not more power than employer. Personally, I can't put up with a…

Yeah, it's really rough. Most people just don't have a combination of confidence, stubbornness, willpower, and raw spite that allows them to uproot and seek out a better position for themselves. I used to think that I could encourage and/or browbeat people into taking charge of their own destinies, but after years of a good 99.9% failure rate I'm not so sure any more. (For every 1000 downvotes/insults I eat on Reddit…

> I think regular people just naturally can't fend for themselves, and maybe they need some form of protection..

Oh they can, but for regular people, a job is a privilege. It's not easy to find one, and a lot of people don't have enough financial reserves to afford a long search. The risk/reward analysis ends up leaning heavily towards staying.

Re: Companies Manipulate Glassdoor by Inflating Rankings and Pressuring Employees

#490

Post by VRay »

PeterCorless wrote: post #326
jorblumesea wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like a really backwards view to see your company as the "only game in town". Physically, it might be true, but you're competing with remote only companies, and regional competing cities. You're also indirectly competing with hubs such as California or Seattle where jobs are plentiful. This is a really interesting comment, thanks for sharing.

Exactly. In Engineering, you are competing with Silicon Valley and NYC as well as the scrappiest folks in Sao Paolo, Lagos, Novosibirsk, Chennai or Zagreb. The best coders with the best management team wins. But only if they get paid to stick around long enough to reach production. Otherwise folk walk. Human expertise and intellectual capacity has a value; you've got to be willing to pay what the market demands.

I wish these market forces were a hell of a lot stronger

I seem to be able to get $250k+ in Silicon Valley and ~$200k in Seattle (which is almost the same after cost of living and state tax), but last time I looked in Tokyo I couldn't get any offers for over 15M JPY/year and even that was a stretch (150k USD at a 100-1 exchange rate, but more like 130k USD at the time)

Likewise, I haven't been able to rustle up any remote job offers for over $150k. I'd LOVE to work from home on a giant ranch out in Flyover, USA for the same mortgage cost as a grungy condo in San Jose, but not if it's going to set back my retirement plans by 10 years

And I've got a news flash for you remote-friendly entrepreneurs: You're competing with people paying $250k/year in the bay area whether you like it or not. Sooner or later some top-paying behemoth is going to put an elite 5 man team on it and make a product that puts your 50 person company out of business. By all means, try to lowball people into $120-$150k/year offers if you can, but if they're not having it, you should consider ponying up.

Post reply on HN