Shopline Limited_商線科技有限公司

The receptionist is very beautiful

Flexible working hours

The office is quite nice

There seem to be more young people

Being a foreign company, the benefits sound quite good

The interviews with the manager and senior colleagues were quite relaxed. We just discussed my work experience and whether I could accept relatively rigid work (I was interviewing for an administrative assistant position at the time, and it seemed like I would have to keep entering data and filing documents).

However, HR was clearly probing into my background the whole time, asking whether I had interviewed with other companies, what those companies were called, what benefits they offered, what my current salary was, and what my future plans were. It felt somewhat pushy.

I was ultimately offered the position, but they required me to provide a salary statement before sending me the offer. They would not even disclose the salary, yet wanted me to provide a bunch of documents, which made me wonder whether they did not trust the figure I had given them. It left me with a bad impression.

There was a glass of water.

I interviewed for a Customer Success Consultant position. In the first round, an HR representative brought my résumé into the meeting room, asked me to briefly introduce myself, then asked questions about my résumé and my expected salary, and that was it.

In the second round, a male and female department manager arrived with MacBooks. As soon as we sat down, the woman asked me, “Where is your résumé?” Sorry, but shouldn’t you ask your company’s HR department that question? The résumé was with your HR department, and they didn’t print it out for you. I really don’t know whether this department is marginalized or those two managers are so out of the loop that they never received it. Finally, while the man and woman were tapping away at their keyboards, they asked some cold, boring, standard questions (e.g., your most memorable customer complaint and your strengths and weaknesses), bringing this boring interview to an end. It felt like they were just going through the motions so HR could meet its performance targets. Everyone, please remember to print several copies of your résumé yourselves!

I really can't think of anything.

Does anyone know what happened at SHOPLINE between boasting a 5% turnover rate (https://blog.shopline.tw/shopline-culture-2023-commonwealth/) and eventually having a mass resignation (https://today.line.me/tw/v3/article/1DrxmN9)?

I can't think of any.

It's a shame that many articles have been blocked or hidden; the content is extremely精彩. I hope someone who has access will back them up and upload them.

A company whose people were taken away en masse by investigators amid suspicions of Chinese capital is not trustworthy. Would so many people have been taken away if there were no evidence? This time, according to what I've seen on Threads, the collective resignations were also forced by the parachuted-in manager surnamed Wang. They probably came over from 91, right? No ability and no planning—only demanding respect from others, while all they themselves can do is yell and bang on the table. It gave me déjà vu of watching macaques in heat screeching. They also brought over a whole group of parachuted-in personnel from 91; I'm not exaggerating when I say it was practically the entire department. I initially thought 91 would throw a fit, but there was no reaction at all. Is it because getting rid of the dead weight has actually left them feeling refreshed? I suddenly have tremendous respect for 91APP: dragging these people along for so many years and still managing to go public is truly impressive beyond words. If they had changed jobs a few years earlier, 91 might have become Taiwan's second “national guardian mountain”! What a shame.

Two days of working from home each week

Let me share my experience. I worked at the company for five years. Later, a new, young manager was transferred from another department. It turned out to be a case of an outsider leading experts—he didn’t understand anything. It was obvious that he had simply been promoted because he had been with the company longer. To submit reports to upper management, the young manager treated the people beneath him as mere tools. This male manager also favored female employees. The company’s working hours are 10:00–19:00, but this manager usually arrived close to 11:00. However, if anyone reporting to him was not on time, he would question why they were late. Even field sales staff were suspected of slacking off if they did not reply to messages immediately. The company has a very high turnover rate; if the manager does not like you, he will pressure you to leave—but remember to ask for severance pay. This May, investigators came to a senior executive’s home in the middle of the night and took someone away; it was reported in the news, so you can look it up. The company is simply chaotic.

Work from home two days a week, no clocking in required, and flexible working hours from 10:00 to 19:00.

The company’s managers are all very young. Some were promoted simply because they had been there a long time and do not understand how to manage. Much of what is discussed during interviews differs from the actual situation after joining. The company has a high turnover rate, with people resigning almost every week. In May, the company was reported and investigated over alleged Chinese investment; the incident can be found in online news reports, and the company is still on the watch list. The warehouse operated by the company’s partner also burned down and was reported in the news.

I find it difficult to provide this information

Male managers often bring up sexual topics in conversation, emphasizing that they accompany girls to buy underwear, or commenting on female colleagues’ bodies, saying things like, “You really have an ant waist.”

They have poor emotional management, losing their temper and shouting during meetings without clearly identifying the problem. After a complaint was made to HR, nothing was done. The matter was not handled according to legally required gender-equality procedures; there was no dedicated committee, and it was simply brushed aside.

It is difficult for me to provide this information.

Male supervisors frequently bring up sexual topics in conversation, emphasizing that they accompanied girls to buy underwear, or commenting on female colleagues’ bodies, such as saying, “You have such an ant waist.”

They have poor emotional management, openly berate people during meetings without specifically identifying the problem, and take no action at all after complaints are made to Human Resources. They do not handle the matter according to legally required gender-equality procedures, and there is no dedicated committee; instead, the matter is simply brushed aside.

I find it difficult to provide this information

Male managers frequently introduce sexual topics into conversations, emphasizing that they accompanied girls to buy underwear, or commenting on female colleagues' bodies, such as saying, “You really have an ant-like waist.”

They have poor emotional management, exploding in anger during meetings without specifically identifying the problem. After a complaint was made to Human Resources, no action was taken at all. The matter was not handled according to legally mandated gender-equality procedures, and there was no specialized committee; it was simply brushed aside.

I find it difficult to provide this information

Male supervisors frequently bring up sexual topics in conversation, emphasizing that they accompanied girls to buy underwear, or commenting on female colleagues’ bodies, saying things like, “You really have an ant waist.”

They have poor emotional management, yelling furiously during meetings without clearly identifying the problem. After a complaint was filed with Human Resources, no action was taken at all. The matter was not handled according to legally required gender-equality procedures, and there was no specialized committee; it was simply brushed aside.

It is difficult for me to provide this information.

Male supervisors frequently introduce sexual topics into conversations, emphasizing that they accompanied girls to buy underwear, or commenting on female colleagues’ bodies, such as saying, “You really have an ant waist,” and so on.

They have poor emotional management, and would loudly berate people during meetings without specifically pointing out the problem. After a complaint was made to Human Resources, there was no action at all; the matter was not handled in accordance with the legally mandated gender equality procedures, there was no dedicated committee, and it was simply brushed aside.

It is difficult for me to provide this information.

Male managers often bring up sexual topics in conversation, emphasizing that they accompanied girls to buy underwear, or commenting on female colleagues’ bodies, saying things like, “You really have an ant waist.”

They have poor emotional management, yelling and swearing at meetings without specifically identifying the problem. After a complaint was made to HR, nothing was done. The matter was not handled according to legally required gender-equality procedures; there was no specialized committee, and it was simply brushed aside.

It is difficult for me to provide this information

Male supervisors frequently bring up sexual topics in conversation, emphasizing that they accompanied girls to buy underwear, or commenting on female colleagues’ bodies, saying things like, “You really have an ant waist.”

They have poor emotional control, shouting and cursing at meetings without clearly identifying the problem. After a complaint was filed with Human Resources, no action was taken at all. The matter was not handled according to the legally required gender-equality procedures; there was no dedicated committee, and it was simply brushed aside.

It is difficult for me to provide this information.

Male supervisors often bring up sexual topics in conversation, emphasizing that they accompanied girls to buy underwear, or commenting on female colleagues’ bodies, such as saying, “You really have an ant waist,” and so on.

They have poor emotional management, shouting and swearing during meetings without specifically identifying the problem. After a complaint was made to Human Resources, no action was taken at all; the matter was not handled according to legally required gender-equality procedures. There was no dedicated committee, and the issue was simply brushed aside.

I find it difficult to provide this information

Male supervisors frequently bring up sexual topics in conversation, emphasizing that they accompanied girls to buy underwear, or commenting on female colleagues’ bodies, such as saying, “You really have a tiny waist.”

They have poor emotional management, and sometimes lose their temper and curse during meetings without clearly identifying the problem. After a complaint was made to Human Resources, no action was taken at all. The matter was not handled in accordance with the legally required gender-equality procedures; there was no dedicated committee, and it was simply brushed aside.

I find it difficult to provide this information

Male supervisors often bring up sexual topics in conversation, emphasizing that they accompanied girls to buy underwear, or commenting on female colleagues' bodies, such as saying, “You really have an ant-like waist.”

They have poor emotional management, bursting into rages and shouting during meetings without clearly identifying the problem. After a complaint was made to Human Resources, there was no action at all. The matter was not handled according to the legally required gender-equality procedures; there was no dedicated committee, and the issue was simply brushed aside.

It is difficult for me to provide this information.

Male supervisors frequently introduce sexual topics into conversations, emphasizing that they accompany girls to buy underwear or commenting on female colleagues’ bodies, such as saying, “You have such a tiny waist.”

They have poor emotional management, shouting and swearing at meetings without specifically identifying the problem. After a complaint was filed with Human Resources, no action was taken at all. The matter was not handled according to the legally required gender-equality procedures; there was no dedicated committee, and the issue was simply brushed aside.

It is difficult for me to provide this information.

Male supervisors frequently bring up sexual topics in conversation, emphasizing that they accompanied girls to buy underwear, or commenting on female colleagues’ bodies, such as saying, “You have such a tiny waist.”

They have poor emotional management, losing their temper and swearing during meetings without specifically identifying the problems. After a complaint was made to Human Resources, nothing was done. The matter was not handled according to the legally required gender-equality procedures; there was no dedicated committee, and it was simply swept under the rug.

I find it difficult to provide this information.

Male managers frequently introduce sexual topics into conversations, emphasizing that they accompanied girls to buy underwear, or commenting on female colleagues’ bodies, such as saying, “You really have an ant waist.”

They have poor emotional management, angrily berating people during meetings without specifically identifying the problem. After a complaint was made to Human Resources, no action was taken at all. The matter was not handled in accordance with legally mandated gender equality procedures; there was no dedicated committee, and it was simply brushed aside.

It is difficult for me to provide this information.

Male supervisors frequently bring up sexual topics in conversation, emphasizing that they accompanied girls to buy underwear, or commenting on female colleagues’ bodies, such as saying, “You really have an ant waist,” and so on.

They have poor emotional management, shouting and swearing during meetings without specifically identifying the problem. After a complaint was made to Human Resources, no action was taken at all. The matter was not handled according to legally mandated gender-equality procedures; there was no dedicated committee, and it was simply brushed aside.

I find it difficult to provide this information

Male supervisors frequently bring up sexual topics in conversation, emphasizing that they accompanied girls to buy underwear, or commenting on female colleagues’ bodies, saying things like, “You really have a wasp waist.”

They have poor emotional management, often launching into tirades during meetings without clearly identifying the problem. After a complaint was made to HR, nothing was done. The matter was not handled in accordance with legally required gender-equality procedures, and there was no dedicated committee; it was simply brushed aside.

I find it difficult to provide this information.

Male supervisors frequently bring up sexual topics in conversation, emphasizing that they accompanied girls to buy underwear, or commenting on female colleagues’ bodies, saying things like, “You really have an ant-like waist.”

They have poor emotional management, launching into furious outbursts during meetings without specifically identifying the problem. After a complaint was made to Human Resources, no action was taken at all. The matter was not handled in accordance with legally required gender-equality procedures; there was no specialized committee, and the issue was simply smoothed over.

It is difficult for me to provide this information

Male supervisors frequently bring up sexual topics in conversation, emphasizing that they accompanied girls to buy underwear, or commenting on female colleagues’ bodies, such as saying, “You really have an ant-like waist.”

They have poor emotional management, shouting profanities during meetings without specifically identifying the problem. After a complaint was made to Human Resources, nothing was done. The matter was not handled according to the legally prescribed gender equality procedures; there was no dedicated committee, and it was simply brushed aside.

I find it difficult to provide this information

Male supervisors frequently bring up sexual topics in conversation, emphasizing that they accompanied girls to buy underwear, or commenting on female colleagues’ bodies, saying things like, “You really have an ant waist.”

They have poor emotional management, often erupting in anger and swearing during meetings without clearly identifying the problem. After reporting the matter to Human Resources, nothing was done. The matter was not handled according to the legally required gender-equality procedures; there was no dedicated committee, and it was simply brushed aside.

I find it difficult to provide this information

Male supervisors frequently bring up sexual topics in conversation, emphasizing that they accompanied girls to buy underwear, or commenting on female colleagues’ bodies, saying things like, “You really have an ant waist.”

They have poor emotional control, yelling and swearing during meetings without clearly identifying the problem. After a complaint was made to Human Resources, no action was taken at all; the matter was not handled according to the legally required gender-equality procedures, there was no dedicated committee, and it was simply brushed aside.

I find it difficult to provide this information

Male supervisors often bring up sexual topics in conversation, emphasizing that they accompanied girls to buy underwear or commenting on female colleagues’ bodies, such as saying, “You really have an ant waist.”

They have poor emotional control, verbally berate people at meetings without clearly identifying the problem, and take no action whatsoever after complaints are made to Human Resources. They do not follow legally required gender-equality procedures, and there is no dedicated committee; the matter is simply smoothed over.

It is difficult for me to provide this information

Male supervisors frequently bring up sexual topics in conversation, emphasizing that they accompanied girls to buy underwear, or commenting on female colleagues’ bodies, such as saying, “You really have an ant waist.”

They have poor emotional management, explosively berating people in meetings without clearly identifying the problem. After reporting it to Human Resources, no action was taken at all. The matter was not handled according to legally required gender-equality procedures; there was no dedicated committee, and it was simply brushed aside.

It is difficult for me to provide this information

Male supervisors frequently introduce sexual topics into conversations, emphasizing that they accompany girls to buy underwear, or commenting on female colleagues’ bodies, such as saying, “You really have an ant-like waist.”

They have poor emotional management, shouting profanities during meetings without specifically identifying the problem. After a complaint was filed with Human Resources, there was no action at all; the matter was not handled according to the legally mandated gender equality procedures. There was no dedicated committee, and the issue was simply brushed aside.

None

This is genuinely the first time I’ve seen someone come directly to Tianyancha to threaten everyone not to post anything further exposing the situation, or they’ll be sued.

If you dared to upload it, why be afraid now? Why delete the post? Isn’t the company still threatening everyone internally not to make statements externally or express opinions, otherwise they’ll find a way to get employees out? Why not write it all up together!

No matter how long a shrimp lives, it can never become a human; with such a big nose, you’ll never wait for the east wind. Don’t try to be a person—you never were one in the first place, so why bother?

This is the current situation: the company is unwilling to improve. If you have complaints, they’ll find a way to get rid of you.

But if you act like an obedient dog, you’ll be protected no matter what terrible things happen. Maybe you could even steal money from the company under an A-B contract and still get away scot-free!

There have been quite a few negative articles recently, and I feel responsible for coming forward to share the truth: this is a company with excellent benefits and systems!

In my department, for example, we are responsible for maintaining relationships with major brands, and the bonus is at least one month's salary every quarter.

(Of course, teams vary. Some product-line managers are not as good at leading, which can make things more difficult, but a good manager will help with allocation, and with a little effort, you can definitely earn it.) The base salary is also definitely higher than the average shown on salary websites. If you are applying for the same position but the base salary is lower than this figure, or the bonus structure is different, I suggest negotiating actively. Our work is actually quite demanding; you may be called online unexpectedly in the middle of the night or during holidays, so it would be unfair to do the same work for a lower salary! Do not settle for less.

The company's WFH policy is also very flexible. Basically, you only need to go into the office once a week for a meeting. As long as you get your work done, you are not required to go in at other times.

The company's systems are also first-rate. When colleagues go out for visits or introduce new products to stores, their managers prepare detailed templates, and employees only need to modify them according to each store's characteristics. If you have just joined, your manager will also attend every meeting with you, help document the strengths and weaknesses of your communication, and carefully guide you on how to improve. It is definitely not like managers at traditional Taiwanese companies, who teach you nothing and only use psychological manipulation to tell you that you are terrible.

I have been working here for some time, and I really respect my manager! They joined when personnel matters were chaotic, but still helped me a lot and taught me many things! If you are interested, you are welcome to come for an interview.

It is definitely not as bad as described above.

However, managers really do vary. If you find that your manager does not seem familiar with the system and cannot really help you, you may have drawn the short straw. Submit an application to transfer to another team as soon as possible—it will probably be better. But if you happen to have a good manager, this is a great company where you can learn a lot and stay for a long time!

wwwwq

qweqwe

The first year was very enjoyable. My colleagues were all great, but they all left.

I can finally log in—thank goodness for Tiān Yǎn Tōng. SL has seemed quiet lately because there was nowhere to make accusations. Now I can speak up.

This is a company actually controlled by people from mainland China. Its parent company is Joyy Group (YY), headquartered in Guangzhou. News about SHOPLINE's Chinese ownership: https://www.cna.com.tw/news/afe/202401080276.aspx. For the sake of investors' greed, senior management began laying off employees indiscriminately, using extremely crude methods. Someone was deemed unsuitable by their manager for not being in the office while working from home in compliance with company policy, and the entire team was laid off. Someone else was laid off for wearing shorts. Some were even laid off simply because their way of speaking was not liked by their manager. There were absolutely no consistent standards. By the end of 2024, dozens of people had already been shown the door, while at the same time the company spent a great deal of money recruiting at least five senior executives from competitors. A team that could originally be managed by a single director now has two vice presidents, with a director under them as well. Saying that this is meant to reduce costs is completely contradictory.

The senior HR executives and HRBPs at this company are also management's enforcers. A normal PIP process should involve setting goals, testing, and reassessment, among other steps. However, HR colluded with managers to skip these procedures and directly dismiss employees. It was only after an employee filed for arbitration that they hurriedly changed the action to a transfer. No one knows what the standards actually are. It is outrageous.

The Chinese Communist Party is a very sensitive issue right now, and YY is a company with its own technology team. The company also develops features such as SHOPLINE Payment and livestreaming. It is hard to imagine where Taiwanese customers' data might end up. Can this company really protect everyone...

Understanding that having connections means nothing happens, and having no connections means things are miserable

Witnessing the downfall of a company. If you are thinking about applying for a position in Account Management, I sincerely recommend that you stop and think carefully about what kind of work environment you want. Work is supposed to support a better life, but a brutal work environment can destroy everything and affect your physical, mental, and spiritual well-being.

Ever since SHOPLINE officially became the Digital APP division, all of the qualities that once made it good have completely disappeared. In the past, SHOPLINE was a company with clearly divided responsibilities. Every department understood its own responsibilities and tasks. Although there was some friction during the process, everyone knew it was for the ultimate goal: making product features better aligned with the market and serving more people. The process used to be: collecting feedback from the front line → evaluation → research → development → launch → training → corrections → updates. The front end and back end worked together in this way continuously. The most important part was requirements gathering. A product conference was held every quarter, and this was an extremely important process for both the product and sales sides. The product side needed to understand feedback from the sales side and current market needs, incorporating them into product development. AMs needed to understand the feature development process and how features worked so they could explain them to customers and report back, thereby maintaining customer relationships. Therefore, both the sales and product sides had to be very familiar with the product’s features. After all, a system provider revolves around its features. This approach had been in place for many years—until the Digital APP team arrived..... Why call them a team? Because they came one after another, and they were happy partners with one another. “The salary here is pretty good, and I can become a manager as soon as I arrive. Who wouldn’t want such a great deal?” And so began an astonishing journey.....

Major changes to the bonus system: This is what everyone cares about most! After the happy team arrived, they began their so-called overhaul. They decided that SHOPLINE was in a state of disrepair and needed them to save it and bring new hope to SHOPLINE. They were the light of righteousness! Under the banner of saving SHOPLINE and improving the company’s profits and losses, they planned to change SHOPLINE with three arrows: layoffs, cutting bonuses, and raising prices. As mentioned in the previous article, after you worked yourself to the bone for an entire quarter and worked hard to meet your renewal-rate and performance targets, you might think you could use the bonus to ease your financial pressure and prove your efforts had paid off. BUT—this is the BUT everyone hates in life—the happy partners directly announced at the end of the quarter that they were changing the bonus system and cutting your bonus. You originally thought the changes would not be applied retroactively, but unexpectedly even the quarter you had just completed was affected. You would suddenly begin to doubt yourself: What exactly was I doing last quarter? Everything you had planned was overturned immediately! Fine, you might think—the system has changed, so surely they will announce the new bonus system. But the new system was delayed indefinitely. During the process of asking about it, you would feel as if you were dealing with a government office: the answers were always “We’re still drafting/discussing/evaluating/reviewing it.” Before the new bonus system was announced, they also changed the year-end bonus. Although the year-end bonus was not very large to begin with, it was still something to hope for. Then they directly announced that the worst performers under the “roast chicken” system would receive no year-end bonus—correct, zero. Everything was decided directly, without any announcement, in a situation with no fairness, openness, or transparency whatsoever. On top of that, the “roast chicken” system was completely unclear. Even if you believed you had met the criteria, if the emperor did not want to give it to you, you could not have it!

Layoffs: The light of righteousness was coming to save SHOPLINE, ushering in an era of mass layoffs. To evade regulations, people were laid off in batches, avoiding the need to report them. Some departments were completely wiped out; others lost more than a dozen people in two months. You might ask why. Sorry, but to this day, no one knows. The happy partners said that if you were no good, then you were no good, and worked with HR to force you out. Even when HR knew there was no suitable reason and no proper PIP process, they still carried out this conduct together with the happy partners. As many senior employees and managers left, SHOPLINE remained in a “we’re not afraid” state. There was no reflection on why these experienced people were leaving in such numbers, nor any thought about why the company had become a training ground for talent. They believed that staff could be replaced quickly: “It’s a small matter. We’re just replacing people; this is normal in the new era.” If you complained to HR about all these unreasonable behaviors—even if you opened your heart and spoke sincerely—HR would join you in saying, “Yes, I told them they can’t do this, you know. Ah, how could this happen?” In the end, the response you received was: “Thank you for your youth and dedication. END.”

Leadership style: As mentioned earlier, these happy partners were parachuted in, one after another. In meetings, they directly told everyone, “Don’t think about trying to manipulate me. Don’t think about opposing me. I’ll find a way to destroy you.” This kind of opening set the stage for the tragedies that followed. The happy partners’ work style was to dodge, evade, and pass the buck—just don’t interrupt them while they were looking at stocks during work hours. Their leadership style was authoritarian. Regarding all business matters, they would say, “We need to focus on increasing merchants’ performance. For everything else, each department should take responsibility.” If another department failed to act, they would simply bang on the table. So, great, AMs became very relaxed: when merchants had problems, they were told to ask the back office. After merchants asked questions in group chats, the final answer was, “Please redirect this inquiry and ask the back office, because we need to focus on increasing performance.” When merchants provided feedback or requested a feature, the happy partners would say, “That’s not something we handle. Send it to the PM for evaluation, because we need to focus on increasing performance.” As an aside, the happy partners remain completely unfamiliar with the company’s product features, but in their world, they believe AMs are the ones who do not understand the features. By using their managerial authority to first declare that AMs were unfamiliar with the features, no one ever went on to consider whether the managers themselves understood them. As a result, many basic courses were arranged for AMs, while the happy partners focused on increasing performance. At this point, you might wonder how performance was supposed to increase. This was something everyone was very curious about: Was there some powerful strategy they could deploy? The so-called powerful strategy was to go out constantly, find merchant owners to have coffee with, and talk about the future. Then they would report back, “I’m very close with this owner. Whatever I tell them, they’ll do. Even if prices increase in the future, they’ll accept it, because we’re buddies.” During these meetings, merchants might ask what features would be available in the future, such as a CDP. Unfortunately, what were the happy partners supposed to do? They needed to focus on increasing performance. They would not know about those things. Thus, the so-called roadshow was full of amusing episodes.

After all this, why could the happy partners continue behaving this way? Because having connections means nothing happens, and having no connections means things are miserable. The former GM was not stripped of their authority; recently, they even formally gained control over the company’s business and product sides. Their power kept growing, allowing these happy partners to thrive. This is the Digital APP division. If you have recently been looking at SHOPLINE job openings, do not celebrate too soon and think, “Great, there are so many openings to choose from!” You should first consider why so many positions are being posted.

You may need a job, but I believe what you want even more is a stable life and work. Please think carefully!

It was once a good company that valued mutual respect, mutual support, and listening.

If shamelessness had a bottom line, I would call it “SHOPLINE AM.”

I urge anyone considering interviewing for Account Management to think carefully: Do you really want to stay at a company where managers use verbal abuse, HR bullies employees, and any problems are pushed onto you? Oh! I almost forgot—it’s also a company that cuts your quarterly bonus at the end of the quarter! All your hard work goes to waste!

The qualities that once made this company great have all been destroyed by a group of parachuted-in veterans from the numeric app. In the past, there was occasional friction between departments, but communication and mutual understanding were fundamental principles. Now, as long as you have strong backing, you can bang on tables and yell abuse, and dump everything that should be done onto another team. Even when a merchant has an issue and rushes to the company, the managers hide on the 9th floor and don’t dare go down, leaving other departments to help calm things down. I have absolutely no idea what they have done as account managers.

All the AM managers are creatures who escaped from the numeric app. They lack ability, and their English is so terrible it’s infuriating. On a form, one of them saw “PM” and actually thought it meant “afternoon.” Another spelled “Mentor” as “metor” and was still smug about it. When I heard that, I could only feel sad. The managers of a multinational company cannot even handle the basics—I seriously question whether there is something wrong with the interview process. They were all brought in by the general manager mentioned in the previous posts. What do you all think? If you have a masochistic disposition, I also recommend that you stay away. Being abused may be pleasurable, but being humiliated isn’t, right?

All they care about is profit and exploitation. Every other week, I have to force myself to listen to their internal propaganda without rolling my eyes. They act as though it’s something impressive, but most of it is actually turning trivial matters into something godlike. Only departments that are far removed from the merchants seem to think there’s really something to it. I want to tell everyone again: don’t be fooled!!!

Whenever I disagree with the AM managers, their VP can only fly into a rage and use emotional manipulation, saying that everything is for the good of the company. Don’t you want the company to become better? May I ask: In what way has the company improved? If it had improved, would more than 15 people have left the AM team within two months? (The number may be slightly off, but it was definitely more than 10.) Would all the teams be unwilling to cooperate? I know you may need a job, but a job is supposed to support a good life—and this job will not give you one!

There are still many excellent colleagues at this company. They are professional and focused on their own responsibilities, and having them around is precious spiritual nourishment. Unfortunately, there is an AM team that is like a rotten apple, making the entire company chaotic and toxic! You may ask: Why does the parachuted-in group have so much power? Because the former GM mentioned in the previous posts has not actually been stripped of his authority! Not only was he promoted to Group Vice President in 2024 and parachuted a bunch of friends into the company, he has also recently officially gained control over the company’s business and product functions. If you believe in SHOPLINE, you should believe in the Group Vice President who wrote a paper using customer data without obtaining authorization!

Colleagues are excellent and conscientious

After thinking about this for several days, I feel that I need to speak up, and I would also like to thank all the colleagues who have bravely spoken up.

I worked with this general manager frequently, and I feel that everything people have said is true—especially regarding the disrespectful language and the preference for PUA tactics. Often, it is not the workload that is difficult; it is having to endure this crude way of communicating, which is very troubling. The defense squad for “Shao Mai” has also happened to confirm this culture, believing that being unable to tolerate profanity means being “sensitive to words.” Such managers are “being genuine” and it is merely their “catchphrase”; their circle of friends and relatives really are birds of a feather. In such an environment, I imagine very few people would dare to speak up, right? Unfortunately, the industry is full of managers like this, and basic respect is simply outside their understanding... So are we really supposed to frequently hear (be subjected to) profanity at work? Is this normal? HR used to seem very concerned, but later it was simply left unresolved and ignored? Allowing this terrible culture to affect the company.

I will not spend space repeating the issues everyone has raised, but the general manager’s thesis issue should be even more serious.... This general manager used internal company data to write a thesis. The thesis contains customers’ confidential business information, and even directly names several well-known brands and their company names. The data covers customers in Taiwan and Hong Kong. The thesis has been online for a long time and has still not been taken down (see the URL for details). It is publicly accessible worldwide, and anyone can obtain it. If customers’ business secrets are leaked, are we supposed to wait for the customers to discover it themselves before taking action? Internally, this person disrespects employees; externally, they leaked customer data for personal benefit, seriously threatening customer security and business confidentiality—yet they can continue to represent the company?

See the thesis here: https://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/bitstream/123456789/90043/1/ntu-111-2.pdf

I have organized the key points for everyone (P3, P29, P31, P35-36). Page numbers are based on the PDF document. If anything has been missed, please feel free to add it.

I hope the company can face this issue directly. If a leader like this can represent the company, or if the company chooses such a leader, it is truly very disappointing to many employees and has a negative impact both internally and externally. This was once such a good company, and so many excellent colleagues are still working hard. It pains me greatly to see them have to speak up. I urge the company to face this issue directly—do not let one person destroy the culture and reputation built over many years. The company’s employees are all kind, but there is a limit, and that limit is already nearly exhausted.

The atmosphere among colleagues is good, and there are many people with ideas.

Thank you to those who bravely stepped forward to speak up earlier. Anonymity should not be allowed to become an excuse for those in high positions to disregard others or manipulate the narrative. The fact that there are so many voices shows that everyone has endured until their limit. Since the general manager took office, how many people they knew from 91 have been brought in as lecturers, internal trainers, or managers? How many of the courses or people are actually capable? They keep shouting about cultivating talent while knowing full well that there are major problems in the HR department but refusing to address them. Some people painstakingly prepared for promotion interviews and failed, while others were inexplicably promoted first—what exactly is going on? Those who are still employed, remember not to offend the king or her accountant partner. The new BP also left in less than a month. If there are other situations, please feel free to add them.

Moving all the managers to sit in one area is another example of bizarre logic. They say that doing things means practicing cutting off your hands and feet—is that meant as physical practice? It has made it much more inconvenient for everyone to ask questions and discuss things, and team morale is also poor. There are also managers who, after being here for nearly half a year, have not spoken more than ten sentences with the team. Are managers here merely to serve as decorations, or to lead the team forward? At every meeting they talk about workforce efficiency, but do they know that internal friction is currently the most serious problem?

The company is good, and the colleagues are good. Anyone with a discerning eye will know where the problems lie after reading a few more posts. If headquarters or management are paying attention and genuinely want to improve things, it would be very simple to investigate whether these claims are true—brief interviews would reveal everything. It is truly hard on the colleagues who are still here.

The brave person who stepped forward to speak first—shot out to the first few people who came forward.

The person everyone at the company least wants to see is GM. Whether it’s an all-hands meeting or a one-on-one meeting when he catches you, no one can understand what he’s talking about. He just keeps throwing around lofty-sounding talk; anyone whose level is never high enough is always someone else. He never reflects on whether he is actually speaking in a way people can understand. At recurring meetings, the thing everyone looks forward to most is his absence. Otherwise, two-thirds of the meeting is spent listening to him speak in incomprehensible jargon, repeatedly explaining the same issues, listening to his inappropriate jokes, or being asked to prepare a pile of unnecessary forms and reports.

Speaking of not attending, everyone should be looking forward to his absence from internal meetings, but it often only happens with external meetings. I don’t know how many important external meetings he has been late to or failed to attend. It’s genuinely embarrassing for the company.

He is constantly trying to establish his authority by belittling others, or trying to prove his abilities with all kinds of theories and highlight how impressive he is. But everyone saw through him long ago. He has worn down a group of colleagues who originally worked with enthusiasm. Is it really so difficult to respect colleagues and respect professional expertise? And then, allowing this situation to continue without doing anything about it—doesn’t HR also bear a great deal of responsibility? It’s truly disappointing to see a good company become like this.

The colleagues are all very nice, and aside from senior management, the team atmosphere is very good.

The response to the Shumai post was, unsurprisingly, exactly as expected. The attempt to steer public opinion was so obvious: they claimed that the anonymous poster had fabricated or made up the facts, but in a company of 500 people, you really only need to ask internally to know what the facts are.

At external meetings, this general manager has also repeatedly behaved inappropriately: using vulgar language, shaking his legs, and not paying attention during meetings. I believe I am not the only person internally who has had this experience. He embarrasses the company yet takes pride in it; needless to say, his abuse of power within the company is even worse.

The reason people choose to remain anonymous is precisely because a bunch of paid supporters or industry peers will defend the company like this and blame the victim. Doesn’t this also happen to prove the network of connections that this general manager has cultivated using company resources over the past year? Verbal humiliation and PUA are wrong under any circumstances. Having to publicly express opinions in defense of someone like this, at the expense of your own career development, simply isn’t worth it.

As the previous post said, this was originally a very good company, but now it has truly become what people on social media describe: a place that blames the victim. If you can’t tolerate verbal humiliation, you are labeled a piece of trash, resulting in nobody wanting to express their opinions. Even when people think senior management’s ideas are problematic, managers either blindly support their own people regardless of right or wrong, or meekly obey and never dare to make a fuss, only shouting, “Yes, sir.”

A few days ago, they even held training on unlawful infringement. Senior management should be the ones taking this course to understand how they are infringing on others.

This company has become vulgar and mediocre, just like the typical Taiwanese company, so everything that happens is considered normal and reasonable. But if you originally expected to join a startup that was flat, had a good atmosphere, respected people, and worked hard, it used to be that way—but it isn’t anymore.

The team is great, and everyone is working hard to make things better.

I originally did not want to speak out, but after the previous post appeared, the current general manager used his powerful network of relatives and friends (or perhaps online supporters?) to steer the discussion toward claiming that the post was anonymous and therefore unsupported by evidence. There were even comments attacking the anonymous colleague. Although everyone should take reviews on Jobmentor with a grain of salt—some are indeed malicious criticism of a company by employees—the many problems with the company’s current general manager have become so egregious that most employees can no longer tolerate them.

I only dare to post anonymously as well, since I am still working at the company. At least most people do not have the courage to gamble with their careers, but I have the utmost respect for those who are willing to step forward.

I will not go into the many seriously problematic changes the company has made over the past year; let’s focus on the general manager’s problems. This general manager comes from a product background. Based on how everyone has interacted with him during this period, as well as the logic and direction behind the way he works and communicates, it is very clear that he lacks business experience. However, since he comes from a product background, no one ever expected him to be particularly capable on the business side. But ever since taking office, he has constantly used extremely offensive language when communicating with everyone, shown no respect for most managers, and gone on and on about how capable he is. Yet I heard that it took him six months to even distinguish between the most basic SaaS concepts of bookings and ARR, let alone understand how to use them. The basis for setting targets—bookings or ARR—has changed countless times this year alone. He constantly talks about how formidable he is with customers, but as soon as he actually meets with one, he becomes weak and gives away every possible discount. I heard that on several occasions he even made highly inappropriate jokes to customers. What he says every day does not stand up logically. When managers offer well-intentioned reminders, he sometimes berates them with offensive language; later, when problems are discovered, he blames the managers and teams instead. He contradicts himself every day. This is probably also why, despite being a startup with only a few hundred employees, this general manager still had to establish a general manager’s office team to handle things that the general manager should have been able to do himself. In the past, the founder and the previous general manager worked directly with the managers to set the company’s organizational structure, strategy, and annual planning direction. It is okay to lack ability or logic; the key is to respect everyone and stop constantly bragging about how amazing you are, as if everyone else were blind.

Later this year, several senior executives from competitors were parachuted in. The cultural differences would be understandable enough, but these two seem not to have done anything since arriving. Every day, they simply tell the general manager, “Yes, sir,” then dump everything on the teams without having any ideas of their own. Honestly, it is unclear what positive value these two were expected to bring to the company by being recruited as senior executives. So far, they have brought nothing but a deeply negative work culture.

There is nothing inherently wrong with the general manager using the company and his position to develop his personal network. But if he accomplishes nothing at the company all day, fails to take care of the company, and puts all his energy into maximizing the conversion of company resources into connections for himself, then I am sorry, but most employees look down on him from the bottom of their hearts.

I heard that the general manager originally even wanted to let a portion of the company’s space be occupied rent-free by a company owned by one of his friends. I do not know why it ultimately fell through, but just having that mindset is seriously problematic, isn’t it?

This company has been in Taiwan for many years and has long been the market-share leader. Most employees have been here for many years and have deep affection for and identification with the company and the team. But because of one general manager, most employees have begun to feel disappointed in the entire company, which is why someone was willing to step forward and let everyone know. This company has nearly 500 employees. If you really want to verify these claims, you can ask almost any long-serving employee and get the same answers. Verification is very simple: the company’s business team also has around 300 people. Before criticizing the anonymous person who had the courage to step forward, everyone should simply go and ask those employees themselves.

The company atmosphere is very good, with the vibe of a startup, and the colleagues are all easy to get along with. However, the management is terrible.

Last year, a new general manager took over. After assuming the position, he established a GMO department, which I heard is made up entirely of his close associates, and no one seems to know what they do all day.

The general manager himself has poor emotional management. Swearing and verbally abusing people are common occurrences (including five-character Chinese profanity, insulting people's mothers, and I heard he even calls people trash). His attitude toward work is also problematic: he is often late for meetings or even a no-show, or he says things that only make sense to him. If you don't understand, he says that your perspective is too limited or blames you for having comprehension problems. He loves lecturing others—isn't this basically PUA? Meetings are often taken off track, and he only shows off the half-baked theories he has learned, applying them in inappropriate situations.

It's like how this year the company underwent a major organizational restructuring based on his self-righteous decisions, splitting the team in two. Anyone with common sense could see that he wanted to divide power, provoke internal conflict, and create a pile of problems. The senior managers were then really forced out—two of them left at once. The new manager came from a competitor, and the general manager himself also came from a competitor. The entire company has been thrown into chaos.

The general manager also loves using company resources to cultivate his own network, and the way he does it is extremely distasteful. He constantly introduces people he knows to cooperate with the company, such as upperclassmen and upperclasswomen from his school or companies he knows, and then expects everyone to take them on. Shouldn't he be avoiding conflicts of interest? Simply put, he is using company resources to pave the way for his own future.

The personnel matters are also extremely disappointing. From last year to now, the systems have changed considerably, including promotion, salary adjustments, and job grades, but everything has been explained unclearly, making it feel like a black box. This year, salary adjustments and promotions were changed to once a year and postponed from March to July. When asked about the reason, the only explanation given was that it was a decision by headquarters. In the end, the promotion results differed greatly from the originally stated schedule, and there is still no news even now. But the GM himself has already been promoted this year—how is that fair?

Simply put, it was originally a good company, but under the current leadership it is increasingly becoming like a traditional Taiwanese company. Anyone considering joining now should think twice.

None

I interviewed for a position in the sales department. They already knew that I wasn't a salesperson from the same industry, yet they still asked me to come in for an interview.

During the interview, the sales manager said, “I've seen many people like you who changed industries, but none of them lasted.”

Me: ... speechless.

If they wanted someone from the same industry, why ask me to come in for an interview and waste my time?

The work, atmosphere, and colleagues are all very good.

But it would be even better not to join the Chicken Leg team.

The Chicken Leg team leader’s management style has caused a series of problems. The turnover rate among members of the team he leads is extremely high, and many employees have negative opinions of him. This situation should not simply be blamed on individual employees; it requires further reflection.

The company once sent an HR representative to ask employees about their opinions and circumstances and promised to consider their feedback. However, those promises ultimately do not seem to have been adequately fulfilled, and as a result, the situation did not improve. The company lacks appropriate evaluation and feedback mechanisms, making it difficult to effectively evaluate the team leader even when his performance is poor.

The following is a summary of the Chicken Leg team’s situation:

1. If a client does not look like a key account (KA), they insist on calling it one anyway. There is no need to provide a 401 report as proof; the company can simply recognize it directly.

2. The distribution of leads is completely unfair. The team leader thinks it is fair, but has been caught assigning them incorrectly several times. He then uses unreasonable explanations to justify the mistakes, claiming that the assignments are based on his logic. Why not just distribute them randomly?

3. The team leader has failed to provide sufficient support and guidance. He only sets goals without offering practical advice or direction, which negatively affects the team’s performance. He only tells you to do something instead of telling you how to do it.

For example:

When a client does not sign a contract, the advice is always: “Did you give them an extra month? Did you show them client cases? Did you give them a dream? You should tell them that the price will increase later.” Sometimes, even when the client has questions, salespeople are told to get them to sign first and deal with it later. Do you really think we don’t already know these suggestions? And are these approaches actually useful?

4. Regarding internal procedures, even when something is clearly his responsibility, he says that he wants you to learn and asks you to try it yourself first. In the end, he rejects your work and says that it is something the team leader should handle. Is this really more time-efficient?

5. When a new person joins the team, other team members are expected to help train them, with the explanation that this is part of their OKRs and that they can teach the newcomer as senior colleagues. The Chicken Leg team leader also tells the newcomer that the bonus belongs to everyone, but in fact it all belongs to her, and she can take half of the bonus. Why fabricate facts? And why give all the deals that are about to close to the newcomer simply because she can get half of the bonus?

All of this has damaged trust and collaboration within the team.

1. Comfortable work environment, good company benefits

2. Welcomes everyone and cares for disadvantaged groups

3. Disposable-chopstick concentration camp

Formerly belonged to: Business Development Division (BD Department)

This isn't even a drawback; it was an eye-opening experience.

1. Management unit = people who stay long enough, have no opinions, and have no performance

A group of obedient little pigs, very cute.

Aside:

There is a big pig whose hands aren't clean but who is the owner's favorite.

He's the best at stealing money from the company, and now he's teaching the little pigs too: make money and split it together!

The little pigs' daily task: find ways to hold meetings; even when there's nothing to discuss, they still have to hold meetings, because they have no experience generating business through cold outreach.

The most important task: fawning over that H. little master who can't do anything.

The little pigs recruited by the pigs: the less experience and intelligence, the better. Then I can trick you by telling you how good I used to be at generating business, while never telling you that all the leads on Line@ and Intercom used to come from E. Pig, A. Pig, P. Pig, and U. Pig.

2. BD finds a bunch of people to go to Google and leave positive reviews. Is this a hotel? Do they also need to wait for customers to call them by name and be ready for the next booking?

None

I’m inexperienced and don’t have much experience, so I’d like to ask everyone for advice.

Is it normal for interviewers to ask job applicants for company information like this???

A while ago, I interviewed at an e-commerce company whose name starts with S. The interviewers seemed to be named Alice and Erin (I’m not sure if I spelled them correctly). They said it was company policy to provide information about my previous company; otherwise, I wouldn’t be eligible for the interview. Although it felt strange at the time, I still provided it -_-a. Later, I thought about it and realized that this is essentially competitors’ information, isn’t it??? Is it normal for them to ask for this during an interview???

This is the first time I’ve encountered a situation like this... I wonder if anyone else has experienced it.

Pros-

The colleagues are all nice people. Everyone is a fellow worker suffering together under exploitation. I came here intending to warn others, so I’ve written everything in the cons.

Cons-

You constantly see the company recruiting but failing to find good people, because it cannot offer friendly, competitive salaries. It spends all the money supporting some useless old-timers, then drives away people who genuinely want to do a good job. (Of course, there are still some excellent managers and senior colleagues with good communication and technical skills who are very capable at leading people.) But it depends on your luck.

The company introduced OKR evaluations, but there is no planning at all. It sets vague, ambiguous goals and has no substantive plan for evaluating individual capabilities, yet this is the most important score determining your year-end bonus and promotion. Senior management made this decision without having any real understanding of individuals. Why? Because your manager and the person conducting the comparison do not understand you either.

In the customer service team, there are truly people who act high and mighty, and nobody respects what they say. Changing orders constantly is one thing; they do not even have basic work abilities. All they think about is slacking off and exploiting the people below them. But what can you do if you refuse to obey? They have the power to determine your year-end bonus and promotion. The company was not like this before, but gradually, incapable people were promoted into management. For those who join in the future, the situation can only be described as miserable. There is no friendly onboarding training, yet you are expected to know everything. People who want to prove themselves only end up causing trouble for other good colleagues. Aren’t these kinds of training supposed to be something everyone works on together to improve the group?

Yet you cannot see the managers doing anything. Their attitude seems to be, “I helped fill the position for you, so you should finish the work.” But they bring in a bunch of people who are still unfamiliar with the business and then use this kind of thinking to judge the team. All this does is make everyone unable to accept it. In the end, the capable people who could get things done gradually leave, leaving behind the corrupt old-timers and helpless new colleagues.

The company’s business is growing larger and larger, which is a good thing. But you cannot evaluate the current workload using last year’s or the year before’s workload. When a manager says, “Last year, one person could handle it, and now you’re telling me you think there aren’t enough people? Shouldn’t you reflect on whether your abilities are simply too poor?”—who could hear that and not become disheartened with the company?

In the sales team, your manager has the power to decide whether you get to stay or enjoy an easy life after you join. If they want you gone, they give you difficult leads; if they like you, they give you reliable leads, and then tell you to split the commission. They can carry out corruption this blatant. I really do not know how the company’s senior management could choose these people as managers. Sometimes you also have to do odd jobs, such as helping move miscellaneous items or promotional materials. If you want to make a living here, it really is all about flattery and pleasing people. All I can say is that being obsequious and likable is considered part of the job ability.

As for the technical department, the people here are all very good, but even the manager cannot withstand the demands from senior management. They can only code day and night, with quality being disregarded because they need to rush releases. The nice-sounding “agile development” was just talk from the beginning. As long as senior management wants something, no one can stop them.

Everyone actually wants to work hard for the company and become better and stronger together. But over time, these issues—many of which could clearly have been avoided—gradually wear down people’s enthusiasm. Every year and every quarter, people give feedback about their workload, salaries, and bonuses, but senior management always responds with empty corporate talk, laughing it off and patting you on the head: “It’s fine, it’s fine. We’ll take care of all this. As for bonuses and salary adjustments, we now have a new method for making adjustments based on the market.” After giving you a raise, they effectively cut your bonus and year-end bonus. I wonder whether they might make some mistake that causes next year’s annual salary to be lower than this year’s.

-This is a decent place if you want to live a peaceful life and enjoy having good colleagues. You can come here, but after being disappointed a few times, you will want to leave. You will still miss the good colleagues here, though. But when it comes to the managers and senior management, forget it.

Pros-

The colleagues are all nice people; everyone is a fellow partner suffering and being exploited together. I came here intending to warn others, so I have written everything in the cons.

Cons-

You keep seeing the company hiring but failing to find good people, because it cannot offer friendly, competitive salaries. It spends all the money supporting some useless old-timers, then drives away the people who genuinely want to do a good job. (Of course, there are still some excellent managers and experienced colleagues who communicate well, have strong technical skills, and are very good at leading people.) But it all depends on your luck.

The company introduced OKR evaluations, but there is no planning at all. It sets some ambiguous goals and has no substantive plan for evaluating individual capabilities, yet this is the most important score determining your year-end bonus and promotion. Senior management made this decision without having any real understanding of individuals. Why? Because your manager and their manager do not understand you either.

As for the customer service team, there are truly people who act high and mighty, and no one respects what they say. Changing orders from one day to the next is bad enough, but they do not even have basic work abilities. All they think about is slacking off and exploiting the people beneath them. But what can you do if you refuse to obey? They have the power to decide your year-end bonus and promotion. The company was not like this before, but gradually, incapable people were promoted to become managers. For people joining in the future, the situation can only be described as miserable. There is no friendly onboarding or pre-employment training, yet they expect you to know everything. People who want to perform well only end up causing trouble for other good colleagues. Shouldn’t this training be something everyone works on together to improve the whole group?

Yet you cannot see the managers accomplishing anything. They seem to think, “I’m responsible for bringing people in to fill the vacancies, so you should finish your work.” But after bringing in a group of people who are still unfamiliar with the business, they use this kind of thinking to judge the team. All this does is make everyone unable to accept the situation. In the end, capable people gradually leave, leaving behind corrupt old-timers and helpless new colleagues.

The company’s business is growing larger and larger, which is a good thing. But you cannot evaluate the current workload using last year’s or the year before’s workload. When a manager says, “Last year, one person could handle it, and now you’re telling me you think we don’t have enough people? Shouldn’t you reflect on whether your abilities are too poor?”—who would not become disheartened with the company after hearing that?

As for the sales team, your manager has the power to decide whether you will be forced out or enjoy an easy life after joining. If they want you gone, they give you difficult leads; if they like you, they give you reliable leads, and then tell you to split the commission. They can even carry out such corrupt practices. I really do not know how the company’s senior management could choose these people as managers. Sometimes you also have to do odd jobs, such as helping move miscellaneous items and promotional materials. If you want to make a living here, it is truly “connections first.” All I can say is that being flattering and ingratiating is also considered part of one’s ability.

As for the technical department, the people there are all very good, but even the manager cannot withstand senior management’s demands. They can only code day and night, with quality being ignored because everything has to be rushed into production. The nice-sounding agile development was only talk from the beginning; whenever senior management wants something, no one can stop them.

Everyone actually wants to work hard for the company and become better and stronger together. But over time, these clearly avoidable issues slowly wear away our enthusiasm. Every year and every quarter, we raise concerns about our workload, salaries, and bonuses, but senior management always responds with official-sounding platitudes, laughing it off and patting us on the head: “It’s fine, it’s fine. We’ll take care of all this. As for bonuses and salary adjustments, we have a new method and will make adjustments according to the market.” After giving you a raise, they effectively cut your bonus and year-end bonus. I do not know whether they might make some mistake that causes next year’s annual salary to be lower than this year’s.

-This is a decent place if you want to live a stable life and enjoy having good colleagues, so you can come here. But after being disappointed several times, you will want to leave. You will still miss the good colleagues here, but when you think about the managers and senior management, it is better to forget it.

I hope to give a neutral account, but since I’m leaving a negative review, I’ve put everything in the cons section.

I once had high hopes of growing steadily together with the company, but due to certain circumstances, I ultimately chose to resign.

What follows appears to have been written by colleagues who once worked hard together; this review is written from an RD’s perspective.

During the interview process, I also felt that the company culture was very free, the pay was generous, and the company respected job candidates’ opinions.

Gradually, I stopped having that feeling. When I tried to communicate with my manager about bottlenecks at work, I was sometimes put off, and my manager would even say to me, “It’s very easy to find someone to replace you,” or “xx, you don’t have much time left here anyway.”

You can indeed seek advice from highly capable colleagues. Most colleagues and managers from other departments are also quite nice. The company is still growing, so there are often many opportunities to try new things. This may leave some people at a loss, but for those who enjoy challenges, it can provide a strong sense of achievement.

Conclusion:
As mentioned in the previous reviews, there are other, better jobs waiting for you.

None

Received an interview invitation, but no response from HR! I still had to call to ask about the time, and afterward I even had to ask for the interview email myself?

What exactly is HR doing! In the end, the interview also felt like it was just being handled perfunctorily! If they didn’t need someone from the beginning, or had already hired someone, why not just say so clearly? Why put on this fake show! What a waste of people’s time!

What exactly is HR at this company doing!

None

Internal infighting is severe, and senior executives are parachuted in—especially H from that delivery platform, who has made a complete mess of things internally. The middle managers are either incompetent or enjoy setting fires and throwing people under the bus. Even the few serious team leaders have probably been worn down by all this.

They recruit new people like crazy to serve as disposable chopsticks, and the company does not care whether you survive. You can only recite a little more Amitabha and pray that you meet a good team leader. If you meet a broad-minded team leader, congratulations! Just remember to hold tightly to their coattails. Anyway, as long as someone covers for you, it does not matter if you fail to meet your targets. As long as you are the team leader’s little darling, it is fine if you cannot meet the goals. If you are not the team leader’s little darling, then let me tell you: fend for yourself. Whether your performance is good or bad is not important; what matters is whether she likes you.

Those who are not the little darlings need to be careful. This could be the beginning of a trial in hell. Customer lists are assigned according to personal preferences, while relatives and favorites get as much as they can. As for the other team members, sorry, fend for yourselves. If you fail to meet the target, you will even be mocked for dragging down the team. On top of that, this team leader’s thinking is extremely distorted: she loves gossiping, criticizing others, and sowing discord. After being caught using fake lists because of her own dirty tactics, she still tried to drag her team members down with her. If you refuse to obey, just wait to be exiled to the frontier—or have her get rid of you by claiming that you “violated the core values.” In any case, it is not as though this has never happened before.

Supervisor H keeps discovering that members under them are interviewing for jobs elsewhere, so they tell their team leaders to hurry up and interview new candidates to replace them. Why not investigate why the turnover rate is so high? If employees at a company are doing perfectly well, why would they want to change jobs? It must be because there are serious problems inside the company, right?

However, this kind of self-reflection will never occur to Supervisor H or the other useless team leaders.

If they ever reflected on themselves, it would rain red from the sky.

Here, they even remind everyone to be careful when looking for a new job (how kind). HR staff from other companies will call them, so remember to perform extremely well; otherwise, who knows what they might say, since their mouth is their own. Wow, everyone in the e-commerce industry is your friend. How terrifying.

If the sales figures are below target at the end of the month, this team leader will also hint that their team members should use their credit cards to purchase company plans to meet the target. I believe anyone who has ever worked in a sales department knows that this is extremely inappropriate, right? It would be one thing if the team leader lacked ability, but they also tell team members to engage in underhanded practices. I wonder how large a slice of the pie the team leader can get when the team member meets their KPI—encouraging team members to do things that violate the core values.

Mm-hmm, this really is an environment very suitable for putting both body and mind through rigorous training. I highly recommend it to all brave souls who want a challenge.

Be especially careful not to be assigned to a certain person’s team; otherwise, your days here will be difficult.

I also advise everyone that there are many other platforms in e-commerce.

Coming here just to gain some experience is not a bad idea, but you really need to be extremely careful of the selfishness and self-interest of those in power here.

Nope.

A company that violates the Labor Standards Act will basically be sued sooner or later!

Ever since an parachuted-in GM, Stanley (formerly GM at Lalamove and inline, a jerk who just came to coast, pad his seniority, mess up the system, and then leave—hehe; naturally, shopline is next to be messed up), came to Taiwan in May 2020, Stanley said that one manager could manage at most 10–15 people, and then started by removing the head of the sales team (although this person was already up to no good and had engaged in bait-and-switch tactics).

However, this GM is currently managing nearly 300 people across all departments (so this is what shamelessly contradicting yourself looks like). I just want to ask: can he really handle it? Huh, huh, huh?!

Then later, he did something even more outrageous: six months later, he hired a completely inexplicable sales head named Hank (of course, one of Stanley’s people). Two people with no sales experience managed things into complete chaos, creating a dreadful mess, and even said that implementing the PIP system was just for testing. Can a large company really let you test things however you want? Why not go back and study how to manage properly and make meaningful contributions!

The head of a sales team only has to relay the GM’s orders to earn the title of head—what an easy job!

Now let’s see what the future holds for shopline! 😉

If you still naively think that having shopline on your résumé is a major plus, we look forward to hearing you share shopline’s future with us!

“Having nothing, yet obtaining the center” could not describe shopline more aptly.

The office is fairly nice, with a very small snack benefit.

1. Policies change constantly, internal rules are chaotic, and bonuses or benefits have been drastically reduced.

2. Mid-level managers lack management experience and are unable to resolve substantive issues.

3. Targets are increasingly impossible tasks, based entirely on senior management’s wishful thinking.

4. A fake multinational-company PIP system: if you don’t meet their expectations, they can ask you to leave at any time.

If you’re reading this and reconsidering whether to apply for this job, I can only say congratulations—there are better jobs waiting for you.

The environment is quite beautiful.

When I entered the office, there were work areas on both the left and right sides, and all the seats were packed in, making it feel very cramped... Then I went into a meeting room for an interview with one male and one female manager. Both of them had Mac computers. The male manager started asking questions, and after I answered, I could only watch the two managers typing away nonstop to take notes. It was just a series of questions and answers, and the atmosphere after each answer was frozen... It was really quite awkward.

There didn’t seem to be any barriers between colleagues; the environment appeared free and open.

Initially, someone called to invite me to an interview and mentioned during the call that they would send a confirmation email. Three days before the scheduled date, I still hadn’t received it. When I called back, the automated voice message told me to dial an extension directly. The person who had called me initially hadn’t said anything about this, so I couldn’t find any point of contact, and there was no relevant phone number online either. On the day, I arrived at the agreed time and was asked to sit inside for a while—about half an hour. A colleague who identified himself as someone involved in recruiting for the position I had applied for came in and explained that the person who had arranged the interview with me had suddenly had something come up..., so he would interview me first. At the end, he also said they would contact me again, but I never heard anything further. From beginning to end, this company seemed not to know who had arranged my interview or even that I was coming for one. I was completely dumbfounded.

None

The office space is extremely small, and the seats are very cramped. It feels like your elbows would bump into the colleagues next to you while typing on the keyboard.

The interviewer seemed to lack competence; they seemed not to understand some basic concepts...

The office is quite nice and tidy, and the atmosphere is good.

Before the interview, it seemed like they weren’t really looking to hire anyone. Trying to get in touch felt a bit like putting a hot face against a cold butt. During the interview, I was asked to write code on a computer in front of the manager, which felt a bit awkward. They casually asked a few questions, and it was very obvious that they weren’t very interested. After that, they didn’t mention the salary or benefits, nor did they ask when I could start, and the interview was hastily brought to an end.

None

The HR’s attitude was extremely poor

They asked about many work details in a provocative manner

Besides feeling like they were digging for information, it also seemed very unprofessional

Although this company operates in the e-commerce industry, they do not even understand many basic e-commerce concepts

All I can say is, being in HR sure is easy these days

Probably the benefits mentioned on 104.

The work environment is so-so, the seating is very cramped, and they play music.

The finance manager was very aggressive during the interview. It feels like the job would be terrible, and I didn't want to continue asking questions. It was a waste of time; no matter how good the benefits are, I don't want to go.

The interviewer was very friendly and offered water. The company environment was comfortable, with music playing, and it was not too far from the MRT station—about a 10-minute walk.

I did not encounter any shortcomings during the interview.

The benefits and compensation are good

Pros

The benefits and compensation are good

Cons

The job posting has been on 104 for a long time and has never been closed.

It feels like they are not making a sincere effort to hire someone,

as if HR is collecting data to meet performance targets

or the department is gathering industry contacts.

I applied several times but never received a response.