Climate Sucks Customer Reviews and Feedback

From Everything.Sucks

Climate is the long-term average of weather, typically averaged over a period of 30 years. Some of the meteorological variables that are commonly measured are temperature, humidity, atmospheric pressure, wind, and precipitation. In a broader sense, climate is the state of the components of the climate system, which includes the ocean and ice on Earth. The climate of a location is affected by its l


Tell the world why Climate sucks!

I certify that this review is based on my own experiece and is my opinion of this person or business. I have not been offered any incentive or payment to write this review.


Enter Code

Desktop Support Technician (Former Employee) says

"They will smile and be kind but then say some off color remarks and reprimand you for being offended. Like most white power structures they use paperwork to RdesAtrPoyE you. Climate may be nice on the west coast. Just think this is a Monsanto/Bayer company this says i use inappropriate language because i say this company has no love or respect for black people. Cons: They do not like black people"

Climate (Former Employee) says

"This company has very poor management due to inexperienced managers trying to lead. Micro managers & The support departments cater to Young fresh out of college kids. The culture is like being in a high school. Turnover is high especially global operations. There is no opportunity for growth, they promote based on favoritism within clicks rather than knowledge & experience"

Engineering Manager - Science Engineering (Former Employee) says

"Personally was stuck working for an "A" personality remote manager who was unable to enunciate priorities but was able to find fault with pretty much everything people did. Cons: Super poor management"

Financial Report Specialist (Current Employee) says

"sister company to monsanto still working out kinks not many permanent positions available treat contractors badly, wouldnt recommend unless for short stint"

NA (Current Employee) says

"The latest incarnation of management brought over cares only about themselves. Everything is rainbows and unicorns, even if there is a massive problem. The team that came over only is looking out for themselves and do not care about those that were already in positions at the company."

Contractor (Current Employee) says

"As a contract employee you will have all of the same responsibilities as FTEs, but with none of the same benefits. You will not be included in various company events or allowed to participate in any activities that promote professional development. All benefits depend on the staffing agency that hires you, so do your research before submitting an application. Conversion to a direct-hire role will likely not be possible without moving laterally to fill a vacancy on another team. Management is hit or miss. Many management positions are filled by previous Monsanto employees with a narrow vision instead of hiring individuals with tech-industry experience. Cons: No opportunity for advancement, management quality is hit or miss"

Customer Success Specialist (Former Employee) says

"A company on the forefront of ag tech, Climate was always making big moves. Always. Meaning that projects, team direction, and focus of daily jobs duties change at the drop of a hat, leaving employees to work tirelessly on initiatives that will be forgotten or altered drastically in very short time. Poor communication of product priorities from front end to back end made for a number of "missed marks" and frustrated, confused customers."

Regional Account Advisor (Current Employee) says

"Former startup company that will be great for anyone wanting to innovate. Company owns market share in digital ag space. Very fast passed environment with snacks in the office."

Current Employee - Staff Engineer says

"I have been working at The Climate Corp full-time for more than a year Cons: Managers slip under the table payments to their favorites"

Former Employee - Data Scientist says

"I worked at The Climate Corp full-time Cons: Constant employee turnover due to management"

Current Employee - Anonymous Employee says

"I have been working at The Climate Corp full-time for less than a year Cons: * Every aspect of the company from human resources to product and engineering are disorganized and dysfunctional * Ridiculous levels of infighting within the organization * A leadership team that is incapable of creating or maintaining a vision or strategy * Deserted offices. Probably because everyone is miserable and just cashing in their pay cheques * Lots of attrition and turnover * Another reviewer said it best: the worst of big companies + the worst of small companies * Monsanto bought Climate Corp. and Bayer recently bought Monsanto. As one person put it "you're working for the most hated company in America""

Former Employee - Data Scientist says

"I worked at The Climate Corp full-time for less than a year Cons: -Oblivious and Clueless Leadership -Arrogant middle managers with bad attitude problems and serious lack of basic statistics skills -Constant reorganization and moving around of employees to new teams and old teams are eliminated. -Low salary compared to other tech companies in Bay Area -Middle managers hire highly skilled folks to work as SQL data crunchers and completely disregard their input. -Excellent Data Science Skills and Software Engineerings mean absolutely nothing for your performance evaluation. -No path to career growth. Employees are promoted based on visibility within company without accomplishing anything relevant to the business. -Office is a Ghost town. Most employees are WFH. - and many more !!!"

Current Employee - Software Engineer says

"I have been working at The Climate Corp full-time for more than 3 years Cons: - Unqualified leadership overall, from the C level all the way down to directors, managers and senior managers. - Low moral and very high turnover. - Absolutely horrible culture, and it is getting worse. Managers and directors are OK with yelling at other employees in meetings, throw each others under the bus and never admit their mistakes. - Absent leadership. You neither see or hear from the CEO, CTO or any of the VPs unless there is a company wide meeting every few months, senior leadership specifically is completely out of touch."

Former Employee - Anonymous Employee says

"I worked at The Climate Corp full-time Cons: No strategy, terrible leadership, company has been floundering for years"

Former Employee - Quantitative Researcher says

"I worked at The Climate Corp full-time for more than a year Cons: 1) Low compensation, not even competitive in the west coast: Many employees have no idea how low is their compensation especially in the west coast. There are many talented people at Climate, if they wished they could interview now and easily get 40-50k on top of what they are earning there. There are some Quantitative Researchers/Data Scientists that could easily be earning twice their base salary as their base salary because of their unique skill set being so hot in Machine Learning right now. The RSUs are also a VERY LOW for West coast standards, and the stock price of the company is relatively stable most of the time; it is not like other companies with large stock price increases. Politically smart employees will change teams internally, interview externally, etc.. as methods to increase their salaries to at least competitive salaries for the west coast. 2) Management lacks vision for Data Science or any Science!: Company is clueless about what to do in terms of data science. The consequence of this is many superfluous projects for QRs/DSs to explore just for the sake of exploring. No real results/impact after the project is done, and the project is not critical nor it is desired that the project is productionized. Data Science is treated as an internal marketing gimmick pushed to the parent company as a way to showcase "all the amazing value being unlocked by ML/AI in agriculture". 3) No real ladder to advance your career: If you write excellent code (you know your algorithms and data structures) and you are mathematically savvy (you are a highly skilled scientist), this means absolutely nothing in terms of your advancement at Climate. Most Middle managers could treat you as a entry level data analyst and you can expect lots of SQL number crunching work. In addition, most Middle managers distrust their staff so your recommendations for simple statistics, hypothesis testing and interval estimation could be discarded as erroneous by a manager with zero statistics skills. There are tons of politics at Climate. The review process as well as the project ideation process has been sequestered as a tool for Middle managers to create a depressive environment for their least preferred staff members in their teams. Politically smart employees will climb the ladder very fast with promotions in just a few months without any (or in some cases meaningful) progress to support their promotions. Promotions are “awarded” based on visibility of the employee within the company. Both of these aforementioned points create a culture of backstabbing where employees fight hard to own a skill set or a project track within the company. Middle managers will partner with their most preferred employees to work as teams for increasing the visibility of themselves. 4) High attrition: After 1 year of tenure, many employees pack their bags and leave. Why? because the cons are more than the pros for them. In addition, company cares little about attrition and many roles are not even posted back for backfilling."

Former Employee - Quantitative Researcher says

"I worked at The Climate Corp full-time for more than a year Cons: 1. Low, below-market base salary. They somewhat make up for this in terms of really good benefits (see "Pros") 2. The Climate Corporation (TCC) may have offices in San Francisco and Seattle but make no mistake TCC is a mid-west company. It was acquired by Monsanto and Monsanto rules it with an iron fist. The values are those of a mid-west company (nothing wrong with that but don't expect Bay Area-level commitment to innovation, software engineering, data science, or even equality). Expect a culture war playing out in Slack, in offices, in meetings between SF/Seattle culture versus St. Louis culture. 3. TCC's internal culture was never good even before Monsanto acquired it. They have the strongest division between Engineering and Data Science departments that I have ever seen. Monsanto's acquisition just made the problems worse. Detailed example (skip if you'd like): Data scientists write internal white papers and some non-production code. There is no guarantee that these internal white papers are converted into or used by a product. Many of these projects are not even necessary and exist solely to provide data scientists with something to do. The projects that do get converted or used in a product are re-implemented in a production language by engineers without fidelity (this is not a fault of the engineers but of the system). The said production implementations are restricted by the lack of availability of statistical packages. Hypothetical example: data scientists would implement a custom maximum likelihood estimation algorithm in R for their white paper but the production language (eg: Clojure) doesn't have the sophisticated numerical optimization routines available. The result is that the production implementation is much much simpler than the white paper and there was never any need to write that white paper to begin with! 4. No satisfaction for data scientists. The products are poor and data science is not really needed that much (though you'll see tons of hype otherwise). Customers buy TCC products because (1) they like the convenience of using an iPad and not because they like the Nitrogen Advisor, (2) Monsanto forces TCC's products on customers much like Google forces you to use Google+. :) Also, I don't think TCC is making any profit at all. 4. Poor Managers. TCC got acquired for a lot of money (~$ 1B). Very young and inexperienced people became managers and didn't know how to manage or how to hire. As a result, they hired other managers who were even worse. Most managers are technically very poor in skills. Some of these poorly skilled managers resort to "game of thrones"-style politics. I have heard of managers threaten individual contributors with dire consequences for silly reasons. 5. Data Scientists use code review and agile process as political tools to slow down members they don't like. Cliques of people (typically based on race/national origin) have formed that act as a political block. If you're a member of a clique, you'll have someone to review your code in time so you don't get penalized and someone to have your back in a presentation you give. If you're not a member of any clique, you'll get steamrolled and will become a scapegoat for "slowing the team down", whatever that means. Pro Tip to prospective employees: may be helpful to find out if your race/national origin has a big enough clique before you join. 6. Data Scientists won't learn much. The general technical talent is too academic and not in a good way. Skills you learn at TCC are pretty much useless outside TCC. Almost no collaboration with Engineering so you don't learn how to put your models in production. No real need for data science products mean there is no useful feedback from real customers. 7. Hype! Hype! Extra Hype! Monsanto aims to hype up AI/ML like crazy -- you can see this on Twitter, LinkedIn, etc. But that's what it is, just hype. In many cases, the ML or stats models are not good yet enough to actually provide useful information to the customer (beyond what the farmers already know about their fields from their notes). These models cannot be improved because precision agriculture needs much much more data. In cases where models can actually help, they're implemented poorly (see my point #3 above) to be of any use. Every team has a dedicated "hype"-person (typically a Marketing employee) whose job is to help the technical people hype up their work on social media."

Former Employee - Anonymous Employee says

"I worked at The Climate Corp full-time for less than a year Cons: * Most of the managers (primarily white men) lack experience managing people, and create an antagonistic, combative culture of finger pointing and name calling, in the open office. The directors of engineering, product and design lack standard organizational/strategic awareness and emotional intelligence. * There is no trust between teams. Fire drills are a daily occurrence (micro-managing directors from many teams frequently get involved to ensure the finger is pointed at someone else) * Some senior managers are micro-managers and others are entirely checked out (rest and vest). * Upward mobility is not merit based - promotion meetings are highly-political debates, managers checked out, hiring is slow * HR is slow to fire / remove problematic employees. * Talent frequently leaves the company within the first year of joining. * There is a lack of clear strategy, lack of transparency, lack of leadership * Not following industry best practices. * No female leadership on CLT, Engineering, or Product"

Former Employee - Anonymous Employee says

"I worked at The Climate Corp full-time for more than a year Cons: The SF culture has nose dived. The place is like a midwestern ghost town some days of the week. Major opportunities exist but mainly in St Louis now which for folks on the west coast is a non-starter. The management has been almost entirely replaced by Monsanto since the acquisition. There is little appetite to take big decisions while the Monsanto-Bayer deal is in the works. Why solve a problem when we can call a meeting instead to discuss it."