Vantaggi
- The best thing about Blocksi is the people. Most coworkers are genuinely good, capable, and easy to work with, and that is honestly the main reason many people stay as long as they do. Pay is decent and (locally) competitive. There are small perks like snacks and pizza fridays, but they don’t really matter in the bigger picture. - The company is also doing well financially and keeps growing year after year, which shows that the product has demand and that the business itself could be pretty successful long term.
Svantaggi
- The biggest problem is leadership, especially the CEO. He holds too many roles, refuses to delegate them, and is involved in nearly every decision. He believes he knows better than everyone else, which makes open discussion difficult. Feedback from people doing the actual work is usually ignored, and disagreements can quickly become unpleasant, including raised voices or verbal offensiveness. - Because the company continues to grow financially, leadership sees little reason to address internal issues. High turnover, technical debt, and broken processes are tolerated as long as profits look good. At the same time, there is constant pressure to cut costs on infrastructure and long-term stability, while money is easily spent on AI trends, shiny tools, or unused HR initiatives. Priorities feel backwards. - Planning is consistently poor. Although the company claims to follow Scrum, it mostly consists of daily meetings. The CEO (PO) often joins late or not at all, then asks people to repeat their updates. Sprint planning is inconsistent, retrospectives are rare, and sprint lengths change based on the CEO’s mood. Work is often assigned late and impulsively, driven by trends rather than clear product needs, which creates unnecessary stress and chaos. - Scrum Masters add little value. They are misaligned, focus heavily on Jira and time tracking, and are extremely slow to respond when actual support is needed. - The core tech stack is legacy, fragile, and difficult to work with and maintain. Much of it was built without proper architecture or documentation, and instead of investing in cleanup or modernization, more features are layered on top. This has led to frequent breakages and scalability issues. - Turnover is extremely high. Experienced people leave often, with little knowledge transfer. New hires are usually junior, given minimal guidance, and expected to handle complex systems without proper support. - Career growth and compensation feel reactive and inconsistent. Raises and promotions often happen only when someone is close to leaving, rather than being tied to performance or long-term contribution. - Work-life balance and flexibility are unfair and inconsistent. Remote and hybrid work, working hours, and expectations vary by person and country, depending largely on individual negotiation with the CEO. Boundaries are sometimes ignored, including requests to work during vacations. - Overall, I would not recommend this company to anyone at the moment. From the outside it looks successful, but internally it feels overcontrolled, underinvested, and increasingly fragile. Without meaningful changes, it risks collapsing from within.
