Bloomberg reviews

No vision, no goals, weak management. Extremely political to the point of comedy. You have leaders how literally don't know what they're doing, and act as if they do! Bloomberg likes to put political hacks in leadership positions where they don't know anything about the subject. Leadership thinks that's wise. It may have worked when there were 20 trusted people in the company, but its a joke now with 15,000.

But there's a rule for everything at Bloomberg that's paralyzing and has highly competent, intelligent professionals constantly feeling the need to seek affirmation of a half dozen leaders/authorities before acting. In my role, for instance, I've got 4-5 people to manage but 5-6 bosses. It's a much different vibe than anywhere I've been. Also say "adios" to your personal time. If you commute, expect a 12-14 hour day. Bloomberg has finally evolved with the times a bit by allowing people to telecommute here and there, but each day is drudgery. Instead of fixing a simply typo of a company name, for instance, the offender deals with a belabored, almost embarrassing process of having to re-run a story with the correction, deleting the old one off the system, then writing a letter to several managers to detail exactly what went wrong; so God forbid you spell it Proctor & Gamble instead of Procter & Gamble -- total rabbit hole that eats up tons of time and distracts. This is where Bloomberg takes its mantra of being candid to unproductive extremes and creates a sense of arrogance among the higher-ups that what Bloomberg does is above the level of its rivals. It's utter nonsense, as is the sense that employees can be rated based on cockeyed data points focused on production levels rather than quality of the work.