S&P Global reviews

The news division is not a newsroom, and it's obvious as soon as you enter the place. It's quiet, and editors and reporters just sit at the computer like robots, racing against time to meet the daily quota. Even though it claims to pursue "journalism", it suffers a severe identity crisis. It is trying to be both a Bloomberg/Reuters-type quick-paced newswire and an in-depth analytical publisher utilising proprietary data. Because of this lack of direction and focus, there is no system in place to train/guide the reporters - the managers have no idea what kind of training is necessary. I've never been in a newsroom where the sole responsibility lies in the reporter, and the editor screams at you for a single spelling mistake and marks you down for non-substantial mistakes, even though they have also played a part in the product. A lot of energy is used on blaming and pointing fingers. The assessment system is designed based not on the quality and value of the content of the article, but on administrative factors such as whether the reporter remembered to attach source documents. Worst of all, it does everything it can to ensure constant insecurity among the reporters.

Bureaucracy - layers of it and no one understands the roles, rules or functions. Compliance functions staffed with people that (mostly) have no experience of the business and haven't done the job (apologise to those that have). Get them working a content job to understand the pressure and pain of systems they design. Content - front line roles have no sense of meaning, autonomy and the compliance rules mean staff are treated like children. Necessary for compliance? It may be, but it doesn't feel like it is YOUR job. Millennials will find this the hardest bit as Platts' graduate recruitment plan shows. Strategy - sales strategy is to exercise Platts' power in a de facto monopoly. Client base for price reports is going down. So the general practice has been to squeeze the biggest clients for more money and offer them some analytics or price reports they don't need. This creates client distaste for the organisation as many many people have commented on here. Great for shareholders. Not great for customer facing roles. Only going to get worse as sales try and force Analytics offerings that the company has purchased down Platts' clients throats. Product management - paralysed. Haven't launched a new revenue-generating product for years and the technology from the companies that were bought was left to wither on the vine. Generally they are hamstrung by a decision-making process that no one understands and crippled by fear of losing revenue. Marketing - Excellent, but (as noted by many in the organisation) they end up marketing products the company doesn't sell. That's because the products the company does sell (PDFs) look dreary. Management - Micromanagement is high with senior to middle managers left with little authority bar being a conduit for minor decisions(big decisions don't get made). Too many times do people ask for guidance only for managers to kick decisions upstairs. There is an uncomfortable succession-planning process where every employee is rated on an overly simplistic scale of 1-4. Managers with little knowledge of employees often have a big say in a rating process that can harm careers long after that manager has departed. Feels underhand. Ask your manager what yours is if you work there. Career prospects - Like any corporate beast it is good if you pick up the lingo, curry favour and don't challenge the status quo. Listening to the colourful tall stories farmed out by senior management, (which I guess is meant to be inspirational) can be torturous though so a rhino skin and a sense of humour is important. Culture - too many people with not enough work to do in some areas leads to gossip and office politics. As many have noted in here, the politics is really really bad. That's partly due to a complicated reporting line structure that very few people understand and causes distraction.