PAPER Reviews

2.5

26% would recommend to a friend

(807 total reviews)
avatar

Martina Tam

Not enough data to show CEO approval

15% positive business outlook

PAPER has an employee rating of 2.5 out of 5 stars, based on 807 company reviews on Glassdoor which indicates that most employees have an average working experience there. The PAPER employee rating is 33% below average for employers within the Education industry (3.7 stars).

Reviews by job title

807 reviews
2.0
29 Sept 2023
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

When I first started working for Paper, the mission of equity was at the center of everything we did. I felt proud working at Paper and truly felt like we were making a difference in students' lives, especially those who came from low-income families or underserved populations. Celebration of work, effort, and accomplishments occurred daily in public, semi-private, and private Slack channels. The company provided $1000 learning stipend, 5 study days, and decent benefits (except gym/wellness unless you were an Apple Watch user). If you were fortunate to be selected to attend conferences, you were able to meet people across departments and share in the energy that was Paper at educational conferences. The highs were highs! Paper also brought some of the most talented, knowledgeable, and dependable hard workers together in the CS team.

Cons

Moral Dilemma: Paper marketed its Education Support System (ESS) as a cutting-edge solution, but in reality, it is a half-baked product that is far from fully integrated or built out. What's even more concerning is that there is no transparent pricing model in place, resulting in smaller districts being charged tenfold more than their wealthier counterparts for the same service. When districts express their dissatisfaction and hesitate to renew contracts, Paper's response is to offer the product for free, seemingly in a bid to entice them back. However, this strategy rarely achieved its intended results. In fact, American districts should consider ending their contracts with Paper early or refraining from renewal altogether to ensure they don’t end up in potential litigation risks, especially given the uncertainty surrounding a company seemingly on the verge of financial instability, all while spending valuable federal funds on a product that consistently falls short of expectations. Lack of QUALITY Middle Managers: In February, the company went through an opt-in/out process, resulting in the departure of many middle managers. Unfortunately, these positions were never backfilled, creating personnel deficits across multiple departments. This left existing employees with heavier workloads and less support. Managers that they did replace had little to no experience. They brought in their “friends” who never worked in education but rather in the restaurant business. Many middle managers lacked prior managerial experience and received little to no training. They often benefited from the hard work of Customer Service Managers (CSMs) who took on special projects without compensation or promotion. Opaque Layoffs and Rebranding: In April, Paper had its first round of layoffs, ostensibly in the name of transitioning to the "Education Support System." The problem was that no one truly understood what this ESS meant. When former educators raised concerns about the naming being used with ESE/Special Education programs, their insights were ignored, leaving many of us feeling disconnected from the company's direction. Maternity and Paternity Leave: Paper offered an impressive 6 months of maternity and paternity leave, but in 2023, employees expecting or planning to start families were laid off in multiple rounds. It raises questions about the sincerity of such benefits. Inconsistent Communication: Middle Management and Senior Leadership (SLT) were quick to contact employees at all hours, creating a sense of urgency. The CEO would even send Slack messages to people in the middle of the night. They did not understand how to schedule a message in Slack. However, when individual contributors had questions or concerns, responses were delayed, leaving employees frustrated. Unprofessional HR Practices: Despite boasting about building a world-class HR team, Paper's layoff list was leaked days before the September layoffs, causing unnecessary stress and anxiety among employees. This is far from the professionalism one would expect. The CPO opening said during a company-wide meeting that those who were left needed to “trust” leadership and that “trust is a two-way street.” This made a lot of people uneasy (and still does) because we opted in in February and were selected to remain after rounds of layoffs. We continued to trust despite bad press and to be chastised like a child in a professional setting was disheartening. The COO also openly said in a company meeting that “diversity of thought” was the extent of diversity within the SLT and they were not going to focus on hiring women, POCs, etc. for that level (aka not their friends). There is no DEI, ERGs, or focus on minority populations. Limited Career Growth Opportunities: Opportunities for career growth were scarce, with the Chief People Officer (CPO) insisting on a minimum of six months in a role before considering promotions or raises. Promotions were shrouded in secrecy and not publicly shared. Long-term employees were passed over, and people of color (POCs) were predominantly overlooked, fostering a lack of transparency and fairness. Wasteful Spending: Paper continues to maintain an office in Las Vegas, despite only having two employees in the area. This is particularly baffling for a company that touts itself as "remote-first," and it raises questions about its financial prudence. Despite financial struggles, the company continued to “invest” in off-site training with a questionable "sales coach," who has personal ties to the CEO. Benefit Reductions: Paper would quietly remove benefits, leaving employees to discover these changes on their own. This included the removal of the $1,000 learning stipend and access to mental health benefits like Headspace, further eroding employee morale. In its goal of fostering a trusting and robust workforce, Paper is eroding the very foundation of trust it seeks to build. Instead of nurturing an environment where questions are encouraged, voices are heard, and diversity is valued, the company's actions have created an atmosphere where employees don’t ask questions, feel silenced, and live under the fear of being laid off if they don't conform to a certain mold. For a company aiming to thrive, they need to recognize that trust, transparency, and employee empowerment are not just buzzwords but essential elements for sustainable success and a thriving, innovative workplace culture.

1.0
21 Aug 2023

A sinking ship

Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

I feel sad as I write this review because I wanted to work for Paper for a long time. I had it on a pedestal, almost. I truly believe in the mission, but it seems the company has shifted immensely. Pros were kind people who gave me a chance.

Cons

I don’t even know where to begin. When I started with Paper, I was thrilled. I thought this was where I was meant to be. I quickly learned that Paper really displayed the true meaning of “fake it til you make it”. The swift changes to the company missions and goals, made it seem like they were having an identity crisis. The opt-in/out, followed by two massive rounds of layoffs with no heads up of the state of the company was devastating to so many. The level of disconnect I felt from the CEO/higher ups - who have never *really* stepped foot in the classroom as an educator was astounding. Expecting cold calls to schools during testing season to talk about usage? Be real. It was embarrassing. But what really got me was the utter lack of communication and respect. It was by far the most unprofessional experience I’ve ever had and it all trickles from the top.

2.0
24 Aug 2022

Many Concerns: Caution

Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Industry specific: There was satisfaction in helping bridge education gaps. Role specific: The tutor manager position was a decent introduction into a management role. I became more aware of management qualities and processes that I do not want to support or embody. It also was a reminder of the importance of aligning your values with the company’s. Micromanagement is common practice here and managers often are directed to do so. The flexible schedule and hours can be nice. The company offsite events were fun (lots of free things and opportunities to network with colleagues).

Cons

I recently left and would like to share my experiences for all those interested in working for or partnering with Paper. I do not recommend working for Paper because of the poorly communicated and unreasonable expectations which led to multiple colleagues suffering from work culture induced burnout. The company culture is toxic. For more details, please continue reading. The expectations for tutor managers are unrealistic, unclear, and often arbitrarily change and are retroactively enforced, contributing to a degrading work environment. For those who like to work towards set goals, you should know that the performance metrics for the tutor manager position were not discussed or released until mid 2022, over a year into the role, which meant prior to then, the duties, tasks, and number of direct reports changed regularly, ranging from the low 20s for some to into the 100 range. Upper management did not seem to understand the uneven distribution of employee workload and implemented directives that were not reasonably applicable to the wide distribution of work when managing 2-3 times the load of peers. For instance, at times upper management directed all in the role to meet and provide lengthy feedback with each of the direct reports every month, on top of a high and increasing level of administrative work, team meetings, and quality assurance analysis. My colleagues were in agreement that there was clearly not enough time to perform the tasks asked, and meet the vague and changing performance metrics in a reasonable work-week. Furthermore, peer managers in the role found out about company decisions at the same time as our direct reports, with a lack of information and standardization. For example, policy changes would be released in an email to tutors, and the email told tutors to reach out to their managers with additional questions. Since managers found out the policy changes at the same time, this led to tutor managers scrambling for answers, in order to meet a 24 hour email response time expectation - no exceptions. Due to the unnecessary stresses, shifting uncommunicated priorities, and lack of communication, I did not find my job fun nor rewarding. In interactions with upper management, I can say that the culture was toxic. My colleagues and I did not feel safe voicing ideas, feedback, nor asking questions - and I can corroborate other statements made in prior Glassdoor posts. I constantly feared that I would be humiliated in front of management, my peers, and my direct reports. Due to the unsafe environment and culture, on top of the poor communication and expectations, many of my colleagues and I were extremely stressed and burned out at the end of every month following spreadsheet metric reviews. This is not sustainable long term. I do not suggest working for Paper as you will be overworked, underpaid, and undervalued.

Viewing 1 - 3 of 807 Reviews

Glassdoor has 832 PAPER reviews submitted anonymously by PAPER employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if PAPER is right for you.