employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

Amazon Web Services

Part of Amazon

Is this your company?

Political - Cheap - Smart People - Senior Marketing Manager Amazon Web Services Employee Review

2.0
4 Feb 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

The brand attracts some of the best and brightest in the business. It is truly a pleasure to work with most of people at the ground level doing the actual work. The brand also opens doors with customers that otherwise might be more difficult to reach.

Cons

The rot starts at the management level, hiring standards and promotion standards work to ensure the people getting promoted are more talk than skill or action. Politically driven changes/reorgs across the org are a constant distraction and waste a lot of effort/time. And since managers are contributing to the decisions on who stays and who is laid off, the problem continues to grow because of course the toxic managers are saving themselves. And by their own admission, Amazon is cheap - in their perks and compensation, cheap in resourcing, too cheap to offer their managers any training, too cheap to put systems in place to help make work efficient. They finally got Zoom and MS Office in 2025, before that it was using internally developed tools that barely worked. Seriously, if you want to work on anything strategic, don't come here.

Explore other reviews about Amazon Web Services

5.0
27 May 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Great job. I’ve learned so much it is just hard with 5 day rto

Cons

The 5 day RTO mandate

4.0
12 May 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Operated in systems that had real scale, operational constraints, and production consequences.

Cons

Working at Amazon Web Services gave me strong exposure to distributed systems, operational ownership, and production-scale infrastructure, but there were definitely tradeoffs as well. One downside was that, like many large organizations, ownership could become fragmented. You often own a subsystem or workflow rather than an entire product end-to-end, which can limit exposure to broader architectural decision-making unless you deliberately seek it out. There was also significant process overhead. Design reviews, operational processes, dependency coordination, and organizational alignment were valuable for learning rigor, but they can slow iteration compared to smaller engineering teams. Another challenge is that large internal ecosystems can abstract away infrastructure complexity. AWS has extensive internal tooling, deployment systems, and operational platforms, which are powerful, but some of that experience does not transfer directly outside the company. I also found that operational work could dominate engineering time at points. Handling production issues, retries, integration failures, and on-call responsibilities teaches reliability engineering well, but it can reduce the amount of time spent on deeper technical exploration or greenfield development. Finally, there is the perception aspect. AWS is a strong name, but experienced interviewers know there is wide variance between teams and roles. The company name opens doors, but ultimately you still need to demonstrate technical depth, ownership, and strong engineering judgment independently of the brand.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All