SOFTWARE HOUSE Microsoft might sound like a nice place to work, but according to its ex-employees it really isn't.
The company has been rocked by a couple of scandals recently and high flying executives in its UK offices been accused of sexual harassment and racism, two things that probably do not come up during the interview process.
Microsoft has denied the claims, which it said are unfortunate. "Our staff were not happy to see Microsoft's name in your paper, in that way," said Scott Dodds, Microsoft's general manager of marketing and operations for the UK to the Telegraph. "Nobody likes to hear those kind of stories about their own company. Inevitably it causes people to look at it very hard and - you know, we were quite upset by it."
But the Telegraph has dug deeper into Microsoft's offices and found other people happy to talk about how unhappy they are.
"Drinking to excess and loutish behaviour was commonplace, along with wrecking hotel rooms and throwing food around restaurants - always on expenses," said one ex-employee who did not want to be identified.
"I lost faith in a company I used to highly respect, especially when the self-congratulatory emails arrived from HR portraying Microsoft as a company that is very charitable. The double standards were sickening."
Morale is not helped by a score carding system that allegedly sees senior staff anonymously rank their workers. "The score card has become the centerpiece of Microsoft," one source told the paper, while senior managers are said to have goals for "positive attrition" and "negative attrition", which sounds suitably Orwellian.
Motivation is further set back by a culture of litigation, rather than innovation, according to the newspaper's sources. "We are using legal means instead of innovation," one executive added. "We need to go back to the days when Bill Gates was at the helm, when it was about vision and principles."
We've asked Microsoft for a response.
Update
Microsoft has provided us with a comment. It said that Microsoft is recognised as a good place to work, and distanced itself from the "anonymous" comments.
"As stated previously it is inappropriate for us to comment on a pending legal matter. However, these anonymous claims are simply not consistent with our values, the strength of our business and our three-decade investment in the UK - all of which is why Microsoft is repeatedly recognised as one of the UK's best workplaces." µ
Tags: Microsoft
"bigger_luddite, you need to get a clue. Your history of OS/2 and Windows NT is... very wrong. VERY VERY wrong."
Not that he got into too many specifics, but what he did mention looks bang on. I've been reading and keeping up with this mess since the late 90's.
bigger_luddite, you need to get a clue. Your history of OS/2 and Windows NT is... very wrong. VERY VERY wrong. But hey, that won't stop you from spreading the FUD now will it?
ITS EASY TO SAY THEY WERE ACTING LIKE LOUTS AND WRECKING HOTEL ROOMS AND RESTAURANTS, BUT HOW ABOUT SOME NAMES/DATES/LOCATIONS? AS IN "JACK TRAMIEL ON FEB 18 OF 2008 WENT BERSERK AT THE HARD ROCK CAFE IN LONDON TO THE EXTENT THAT POLICE INTERVENTION WAS REQUIRED".
PLUS, I WANT TO SEE BEFORE-AND-AFTER PHOTOS OF THE DESTRUCTION. MUG SHOTS WOULD BE APPRECIATED ALSO.
M$ was NEVER about "vision", unless means ways to wipe out competition and grab all the money possible. -- Sadly, some will think that a good goal.
It's amazing to see history revised right in front of one's eyes. I was there, people. M$ consistently had lousy products, and used illegal tricks such as secret hooks for IE into the OS, and planting traps for other products. M$ even obstructed what Gates himself said was the successor to DOS: OS/2, after some mysterious falling out with IBM. (Yet the OS/2 phase remains basis of NT versions up to W7!) Every time Gates had to choose tech or money, he chose money.
That most people now have nothing to even compare M$ OSs with ought to be the biggest source of outrage, but they think that M$ won because best tech, not most ruthless at getting money.
The only specifics we get are
"Drinking to excess and loutish behaviour was commonplace, along with wrecking hotel rooms and throwing food around restaurants - always on expenses"
This sounds like any works do in any given company.
It also sounds like a personnel issue, why doesn't the individual take this up with the specific people concerned rather than spew it into the media anonymously? That's the trouble with anonymous whistle-blowing, there is no accountability to whether there is any hint of truth in it or what extent thi 'loutish behiour' takes and makes a company look bad on the actions of the individuals that work there.