The Downside of a “3B Start up” - Senior Director of Product Strategy bei Infor: Mitarbeiterbewertung

1,0
15. Nov. 2017
Empfehlen
CEO-Befürwortung
Geschäftsprognose

Pros

The prospects of joining Infor seem promising. Management promotes themselves as the 3B start-up. Dynamic. Exciting. Filled with possibilities.

Kontras

Management’s focus is on only the financial bottom line which means no product investment, frequent reductions in force and policies intended to deny variable compensation payouts. The culture in the middle and below as a result is stressed and toxic. Turnover is extremely high. People can’t get paid, get ahead or feed their families. The good leave the bad wait to be terminated. No avenues exist to deliver on the vision or fix critical problems. The vision painted to the market is effectively an ongoing, unfunded mandate. Top customers are in crisis. Maintenance revenues are at risk.

Mehr Bewertungen zu Infor entdecken

5,0
5. Mai 2026
Empfehlen
CEO-Befürwortung
Geschäftsprognose

Pros

Great company to work for. Flexible. Great mentors and access to leadership.

Kontras

Leadership changes frequently Infor has a few "focus" industries - its best to be in one of those lines of business if you want to maximize sales compensation.

avatar
Reaktion von Infor
1mo
Thank you for your review. We’re delighted to hear about your positive experience with us.​ ​ We are the forefront of industry trends and emerging technologies, ensuring our people constantly have new opportunities to learn, grow, and accelerate their careers. ​
3,0
22. Mai 2026
Mitarbeiter (anonym)
Empfehlen
CEO-Befürwortung
Geschäftsprognose

Pros

I like working at Infor. I’ve been here for roughly five years. I enjoy the work, believe in the product, and genuinely like the people I work with and for.

Kontras

There has recently been a very strong “AI-first” push across the company. To be clear, I understand the value. AI absolutely can streamline operations and free people up to focus on higher-value work. Used correctly, it’s useful. The problem is that there does not appear to be a clear or consistently enforced policy around what constitutes appropriate use versus misuse or outright abuse. There should be better guidance around where AI helps productivity, where it introduces risk (especially around company information being entered into public tools), and where the line is between use and replacement of basic job responsibilities. For example, I recently had a coworker explain that they created AI automation to read and manage their emails so they rarely have to review or respond themselves, while acknowledging things are likely missed. The same person records meetings for transcripts, leaves their laptop during the call, then relies on AI afterward to summarize what happened. At a certain point, it raises a legitimate question: are we using AI to improve productivity, or are we using it to avoid participating in the job altogether? Right now, reactions internally seem split. Some employees view this as a serious abuse of the technology, while others appear fully on board with it. That disconnect alone suggests the company needs clearer expectations and policy guidance. AI should support human judgment and critical thinking. Not eliminate the need for employees to engage in their work entirely. And how does the company determine when that is being done?

avatar
Reaktion von Infor
3w
At this time of change, growth, and continuous improvement, our employees are encouraged to speak up if they see an opportunity to make our ways of working better. Please send your feedback to myfeedback@infor.com so we can better understand your concern.
Bewertungen anzeigen nach: Hilfreich|Sterne|Datum|Alle