Hacker News Reader

Comment by mytailorisrich | Hacker News Reader

My experience is this: "Companies encouraging staff to leave more positive reviews is a common way to increase the score."

I see many reviews that are complete positive BS and are aimed at increasing the company's score, either to offset previous bad reviews, or because the company is hiring and wants to look good.

I would not say that this is "smart"... You might get people to accept offers but if the work environment is bad they'll leave so the end result is just to increase turnover and to trash the company's reputation (which will make hiring more difficult).

IMHO companies should forget about Glassdoor reviews and focus on the actual work environment. But of course the reality is that the Glassdoor score is a nice, simple metric that HR can boast about improving... so that's what happens, instead.

View on HN

> I would not say that this is "smart"... You might get people to accept offers but if the work environment is bad they'll leave so the end result is just to increase turnover and to trash the company's reputation (which will make hiring more difficult).

They can kick the can down the road and make money.

IBM coasted on its reputation for decades and even now it's a big company and still respected in many arenas.

Reputational damage is hyper overrated.

The average individual doesn't have the time or inclination to do research.

"The average individual doesn't have the time or inclination to do research."

I took the time to do research on the companies I interviewed with, but the reviews on sites like Glassdoor are completely untrustworthy.

Virtually every company had reviews which praised them to the moon, and reviews that said they were a company from hell. Which to believe?

> The average individual doesn't have the time or inclination to do research.

This is probably true for small-to-medium sized purchases, but for hiring? I suspect people are much more inclined to do their research when they're about to trust their livelihood to a company, especially in fields where they have other options.

True, but what happens looks a lot like this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36082954

And then people are back to judging the financial offers and their own gut based on the interview, I imagine.

The information asymmetry is massive between companies and employees.

And the reality is that at large companies people are in roles and with groups they love (at least for a time) and people are in roles or with groups they can't wait to get out of.

As a job seeker I would not just look at the general score - that's a very poor preparation for interviews. I would recommend reading the reviews and I'd start with the bad. Most of this will be obviously disgruntled nonsense but at some point you start getting real information as unhappy people have less reluctance to share.

The thing is that it's all the same package: Good scores and glowing reviews that have little to do with reality. I agree that it is useful to seek the bad reviews to check how their content compares with the good ones, but I think it's very difficult to get an accurate picture overall.

Even with the best intentions, no-one can make a good picture of anything in life, because there are so many different facets, even two team members can experience the same work as an opportunity for careers or a stressful experience with a boss expecting too much.

The bad reviews show the failure modes of the company.

In my experience if you can find a topic most bad reviews talk about and all positive reviews avoid (or directly contradict), it is probably true. Whether you find this an issue is something you can then decide for yourself.

"Most of this will be obviously disgruntled nonsense but at some point you start getting real information as unhappy people have less reluctance to share"

I could find no way to tell the real from the fake. Anyone can write anything.

Detecting fakes is the wrong question. You don't even try to tell if any particular individual reviews are real or fake.

You just read a bunch, and see if they are random, or if there is a pattern where many have something in common.

If 70% of the negative reviews say anything at all about aimless priorities and never being allowed to finish a job properly before being moved to the next thing, that company definitely has that specific kind of problem.

I read the reviews of my company (big, so many reviews) and I find them generally spot-on. Again, with obvious filters: if one gives 1/5 on everything it tells me to not take it very seriously. Same for 5/5 reviews.

I wish more companies also focus on their product instead of their marketing. In reality the money is a simple (and desirable) metric and become the only one as soon as market is reach. Like if the new moto would be « create a great product until it sells ».

Reply on news.ycombinator.com