employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

Amazon Web Services

Part of Amazon

Is this your company?

Good stable job, but has become uninspiring - Senior Solutions Architect Amazon Web Services Employee Review

4.0
Mar 28, 2025
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

AWS is a good place to work, the business is still growing fairly rapidly and if you maintain good work visibility you could stay at L6 forever. It's a comfortable salary with personal growth potential if you put in the work. I had supportive managers that pushed me to learn and grow. The people in my immediate org were fun to hang out with and other orgs were accessible and open to help you if you asked for it. Overall it's good in the sales org and I recommend it as a place to work.

Cons

AWS used to be on the bleeding edge, releasing inspiring service updates and had this exciting vision of the future, but that vision has largely faded in the wake of GenAI mania. GenAI caught AWS off guard in 2022 and the organic cloud growth shifted to "hard selling" customers on GenAI services, which changed the sales org for the worse. Leaders became hyperfocused on individual metrics and salesforce numbers which put a lot of stress on everyone. In my opinion AWS hasn't released anything really ground breaking since 2021, just incremental improvements to already good cloud services. This culture change put a lot of people into "fear mode" as scrutiny increased, but the daily work was largely the same. But if you know how to navigate the expectations, and being "inspired" isn't your thing, then you can easily thrive at AWS.

Explore other reviews about Amazon Web Services

5.0
Jun 16, 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Great company with challenging assignments

Cons

Lot is expected of you

4.0
May 12, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

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

Cons

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

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All