Could be managed a lot better - Avis employé Tam Leader Innodata

2,0
12 avr. 2026
Recommande
Approbation du PDG
Perspective commerciale

Avantages

Some flexibility Work from home

Inconvénients

One thing I really didn’t enjoy about the guidance: our client sets a bench mark of having 85% “utilization”. Basically stating that of the 40 hours worked, 85% of that must be in “production code”, so about 35ish hours a week. The rest of the time can be spent reviewing emails, guidelines, etc. The project manager basically had management tell people that they could be 2.5 hours in other codes, and about 37.5 should be in production. If this is a decision from a client, then great, but it seemed to me the project manager was just trying to get every little bit of production possible out of people. I’m under the impression that if employees are treated like people and given proper breaks, the quality of work will be way better. If you force them to sit for 7.5 hours or a 8 hour day in front of a screen, the quality will be worse. The client says it’s 85% utilization, so why are we telling our employees they need to be in production for 37.5 hours out of the day? It just seems dishonest. Data annotation work can be tough and some of the tasks are repetitive and can take a lot of concentration. Half of the admin, forgets what it’s like to work in the queues, and drive these numbers blindly. Meanwhile, half of their job consists of chatting on teams all day.

Découvrez plus d’avis sur Innodata

5,0
2 févr. 2026
Recommande
Approbation du PDG
Perspective commerciale

Avantages

Great place to work with consistent communication.

Inconvénients

Days can get repetitive and dry

2,0
25 juin 2026
Recommande
Approbation du PDG
Perspective commerciale

Avantages

The vast majority of the people I worked with on projects for a major internet company were friendly and educated. The pay was decent for trivial remote work.

Inconvénients

Projects were tedious at best and seemed poorly designed. Rubrics designed either by the contracting company or Innodata were often poorly thought through, and rules tripped over themselves or remained ambiguous. The company we were sub-contracted to was infamous for not replying to inquiries asking for clarification for how to evaluate the AI. Prompts given to the AI were often incoherent--just a word or name, often misspelled--which left us making arbitrary decisions about how well the AI addressed the prompt. Rubrics were hidden from employees evaluating the AI, though that seemed to be a result of neglect by a company still figuring out how to run things, not an active decision to deceive employees. I left well before the recent waves of layoffs. Management had tried to assure us that jobs were secure, but that seemed delusional given that the contracting company was farming out work through other companies rather than hire us itself.

Voir les avis par: Utile|Évaluation|Date|Tout