What is the salary like at Pearson?

1. Good people and team with a fun culture 2. Some leaders had good mentoring and 1 on 1 practices 3. Yearly company conferences at Gold Coast 4. Growth opportunities - secondment and shadowing 5. Focus on Work Life Balance

1. Too much focus on diversity and inclusivity and not work 2. Leadership needs to keep their promises

Great benefits, good salaries, excellent working culture for staff.

Extremely competitive to progress, often against external candidates.

Great option for temp/gig work as they only require a college degree

little room for advancement, long hours, low pay and no benefits

Good pay for interns, interesting and useful intern program, great office culture.

Projects can be a bit slow, some ended up unfinished/rushed at the end and some were just intern projects with no actual use to the company.

Good pay, paid for breaks too inbetween so the set up and reset times are all paid, great management, easy instructions

None, it was all very clear and easy to be involved with. Would do it again.

Good pay and benefits, some flexibility

Fired without warning Little documentation re training

I hope this comes across as a fairly well-thought-out answer because I truly want people to benefit from the review and make a decision accordingly. So here are the upsides of working here: a. Fairly competitive pay for someone just starting in their publishing career. Good benefits when it comes to health insurance, leaves, and things like bonuses and employee engagement. Also invests in employee engagement initiatives; an active HR team is usually a sign of a very healthy company (most of the time). b. Strong leadership (at the highest editorial levels such as Director of Content Strategy, Managing Editors and Chief Editor). I had an especially understanding managing editor who could be really kind and often offered valuable guidance and quickly issued leaves without question; there ARE some substantial shortcomings in the management too but I'll list those in the 'Cons' below. c. Steep learning curve wherein you'll get the opportunity to learn the ropes of publishing and editing (with a particular focus on academic editing). d. Lots of learning opportunities such as weekly editorial workshops, team-building activities, and a ton of online certifications you can more or less complete at your own pace and time. In short, if you're a rookie editor clueless about how great writing truly works, you'll get to know very soon. The managing editors and director can be very blunt but I reckon that when you're just starting out, bluntness can be a great thing. You need someone to mentor you and quibble about your shortcomings as an editor. e. A team of fellow editors and colleagues who know their job well, and are competent at what they do.

Okay, so here's the tough bit. No hard feelings here Team Pearson, but this is just what I felt. I hope it'll be useful to you. a. Patronizing behaviour and a lack of constructive feedback from team members. Some of the editors can take their snobbery to a new level, and I'm not even kidding. I don't see why you have to be so rude to someone barely learning the ropes of the industry. A little kindness goes a long way, people! b. Growth here is a steep curve that flatlines once you work on two or three projects. From then on, staying here can be a Sisyphean task as every project is almost identical and there are not a lot of learning opportunities. Like I said, up to a year or two here is fine, but after that, you need to pack your bags and get going. c. I get that communication is important, but honestly, some editors seemed more focused on showing off their public speaking skills than their editing skills. As an editor, your first and only job is to excel at editing and be very good at it. At Pearson, that was often not the case (at least in the Global Editions team). They'd take forever on small edits but jump at the chance to be in meetings, as comfortable in those as fish in water. Even some senior editors seemed better at talking than editing, you know, townhalls, the whole "mountains out of molehills" thing. d. Very flat hierarchy. Old-fashioned promotions and a meaningless appraisal system that doesn't do anyone favours. It felt like there wasn't much room for advancement. Promotions seemed to be based on who could talk the most, not necessarily who did the best work. e. Look, I know work isn't about making friends, but the fake-nice routine some colleagues had was off-putting. It felt like they didn't actually care about being helpful. What's with the endless fake kindness and offers of help when you can't even stand the person? Please don't do it. f. Being an editor is about the editing, not your personality. Whether you're introverted or extroverted shouldn't matter. It shouldn't come down to playing favourites based on who puts on a good show. Look at their work and then play out the favouritism. g. Immense workload at the beginning of each year but not a very hefty salary to show for it. There, I said it. The pay is good as long as you're working 8 hours a day, but when you're having your editors focus on super time-intensive projects, it's time for some rewards, bonuses, or even appreciation. There was minimal appreciation from my manager, and I felt broken about it at times because I knew how hard I was working and how many hours I'd put in, and yet, I had team members always turning up their noses at my work or not even telling me if I was going in the right direction. What I mean is, if you're a junior employee here, chances are you could be running around like a headless chicken in no time.

Great benefits, great mentors, and you get to work from home.

Things can change from one work day to the next. Sometimes you might have up to 500 students assigned to you. Pay is lower than other companies.

Good salary, remote working, international colleagues, great CEO

Lazy colleagues in UK office

The work was varied, challenging and interesting. Lots of opportunities to learn new things and grow as a professional. Pay was at par with the biggest publishers and perks were decent, including private health insurance, bonus and share options. The publications division was remote-first, offering flexibility. My manager was supportive and fair and the team was very cooperative. Lots of trainings and workshops.

Unfortunately, the division is perpetually short staffed and have high attrition rates. As a result work pressure is relentless and stressful.