NASDAQ OMX Group Reviews

I have been working at NASDAQ OMX Group

Pros – There are few if any in this country who have a similar skill set who get to do what I do and get a decent salary with nice benefits and get a bonus on top o that.

Cons – Senior management are overall pretty human, but the select C-level have the attention span of rabbits when it comes to the common employee gripes. And it always seems like you are one mistake away from unemployment, eben when things are goin well for the overall company. Never a word of positive feednack, but loud criticism for the most minute of mistakes. Definitely micro-managing and reactionary managment.

Advice to Senior Management – You set the agenda, but your employees are the fuel that fires the engine. Do more to ensure that morale stays high, Press your managers to be honest about who really deserves some recognition and stop allowing them to keep rewarding their flunkies.

Yes, I would recommend this company to a friend

I worked at NASDAQ OMX Group

Pros – Interesting and challenging work in a competitive environment and field. If you work in the "right" department, your potential for learning, development and advancement is limitless. Skills and competencies are easily transferable to other financial services firms, particularly those on Wall Street. Flexible schedules are available, and, in some cases, encouraged. There is a diversity of opportunities given the structure of the company so there is something for everyone.

Cons – Huge disparities in employee treatment across departments. Some managers promote and reward performance for even mediocre employees; while other managers do little to reward stellar workers. The pay does not keep pace with industry standards.

Advice to Senior Management – Ensure that there is more parity in development, advancement and compensation throughout the organization.

No, I would not recommend this company to a friend

I worked at NASDAQ OMX Group

Pros – They spent a lot of money on brand awareness, that could work in your favor when looking for a new job. Seriously though, it's a good place to start out and definitley a place where change can happen. The company is very dynamic and open to cultural change, you just need to have the fire in you to go and initiate change.

Cons – Long hours for one. Two is that sometimes you'll finish a project on time, and it works well, but the sales side can't figure out how to sell it and it will die on the vine. I also wouldn't classify the company as Entreprenurial. The technical support staff leaves a lot to be desired as well. I was alsways dumbfounded at the lack of familiarity the support staff has with the product lines that customers are calling in for. In one case someone actually anwsered the phone with the greeting, "INET NASDAQ how can I help you?" Is that the standard greeting for tech support for market makers? Does that guy even know what company he works for? Is there any standardization at all going on with call scripts?

Advice to Senior Management – I would try and untangle the data products business line from the market data side. They, by design of the organization, have been placed directly at odds with each other. As a result, there is fierce competition between the two groups to the point of duplicated efforts, poached sales lists, and anti-productivity. I've even gotten the notion on some calls that one line will intentionally not release a product even if it's a good idea and has a solid business case just because they don't want to deal with the other. In my opinion, one solution to this problem would be to merge the groups.

The marketing group also may need to be decentralized but controlled by a small group to ensure that the efforts from each product line adhere to branding starndards and a unified marketing message. What's going on now is that it's so locked down and centralized that it's almost impossible to get a both accurate and creative market message out regarding a new product. The marketing area should also be responsible for the analysis of the statistical data generated from the marketing vehicles that are being used. There is pretty much no standardization of the way market collects this data across the marketing vehicles to judge things like response rates to certain types of advertising, visits and user data from the various websites (and there are many). Again, this is only my opinion, but there doesn't seem to be a solid handle on all of the market data points coming into the company from all of the marketing venues. This is severely hindering the cross sellability of all exisiting gproducts as well as the impact of getting new customers roped in. There is also a lot of money being spent by the marketing team to outsource the creation of a lot of the verious ad materials and not enough time spent talking to the customers/business lines/technology side to get a handle on what the product actually sells to the customer so an effective marketing piece can be created. This area needs to be revamped.

Technology is also a little dicey, but not nearly as bad as it could be. It's biggest threat is (and probably always will be) that there is a culture of "my way is the right way" and it centers around job security. If there was a reward system in place for rewarding innovation rather than empire building, that may help. Also, there is a clear tactic that seems to have gotten a lot of traction (right before I left anyway) which was used by some senior managers on the technology side This tactic would be to create a crisis and then solve it in order to remain visible. It seems that visibility is where the pot of gold lies for the management and staff. This leads to stress on the empployees (which could account for the low morale in some way and wasted money in the form of hours spent solving problems that are blown out of proportion. In my opinion, this type of crisis management can never lead to a smoothly running operation where innovation and actual capitalism can allow the business to grow.

No, I would not recommend this company to a friend

I worked at NASDAQ OMX Group

Pros – potential for stock option appreciation from ruthless and greedy management

Cons – No corporate culture, low morale, poor senior management, no respect for individuals

Advice to Senior Management – People are an asset; value and develop them

No, I would not recommend this company to a friend