Ask HN: Are Glassdoor reviews a reliable indicator of a company's culture?

Post by tixocloud » Fri, Oct 13, 2017, 9:06 PM UTC

reureu wrote: post #48

llaith wrote: post #34

In my experience, the negative ones are usually absolutely reliable! When I have left a place happy, I usually forget to write a good review. When I leave a place that was a nightmare to work at, I don't forget to spill the beans to warn people away. It's not uncommon for a company to have some sort of management shuffle, a new (worse) culture is imposed, and people start to leave and write negative reviews. Then the…

> Then the company will hire a firm to write them positive reviews One company (Series D, 300+ employees) that I worked at did this, sort of. It was less a hired firm, and more the CEO posting. > and the BS positive ones like 'it's a challenging place to work, the people posting negative reviews are used to workplaces where they need less initiative blah blah blah. Absolutely. There are a few key phrases that are hug…

Post by jotjotzzz » Fri, Oct 13, 2017, 9:10 PM UTC

Post by toast0 » Fri, Oct 13, 2017, 9:50 PM UTC

devdad wrote: post #123

Waterluvian wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That made me think about the reviews in app stores these days. There will be a valid complaint and rating, followed by a response from the company that might be something like, "this has been addressed in the next version. we're sorry you had a bad experience." Something like that turns a 1 star rating into a positive signal to me. Maybe Glassdoor reviews need the opportunity for a company representative to say, "thi…

I often struggle with app store reviews, because people that are satisfied won't go and rate the app out of the blue. Non-technical users that can't follow an industry standard sign up flow will go completely nuts and give one star with completely insane comments. I used to believe that the "please rate my app"-popup was bad ux. Now I know why it's used. I'd think the same pattern applies to GD. Why would I write a r…

Post by Balgair » Fri, Oct 13, 2017, 10:22 PM UTC

TwoNineFive wrote: post #127

Balgair wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does anyone know how GD is funded? Is it ads or do companies pay somehow to be listed? I ask, as the payment method is critical to understand it's reliability. If it is ads, then yes, I think it should be reliable. 'You' are the 'product' in that case. More negative press will likely keep you clicking and searching about, therefore more money. If it is the companies, then it it not likely reliable. Why would you pay…

You can pay Glassdoor to become an "Engaged Employer": http://resources.glassdoor.com/contact.html?channel=homepage... So yes, Glassdoor's intensive structure is aligned to make employers happy. They don't take any income from individual review contributors or readers.

Post by btown » Fri, Oct 13, 2017, 10:41 PM UTC

audleman wrote: post #87

gdilla wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With NLP and ML any company can know who wrote what review if they wanted to. They have all your emails and thus writing style is easily ascertained.

> With NLP and ML any company can know who wrote what review if they wanted to And the motivation to dedicate resources to this is...? You already fired the person, what does it matter if you find out who they are?