Frustrated but hopeful - Anonymous employee Health Catalyst Employee Review

3.0
Sep 1, 2020
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

There are so many pros to working at HC. More pros than cons for me despite the diminishing experience of the last few years. I might have preferred to give 3.5 stars if that were an option but given the downward trend of my rating over the last couple of years, 3 feels more accurate than 4 stars at this point. Overall, I won't say much about the pros as they've all been mentioned here many times. I agree with almost all of what has been listed here as pros, and despite my concerns I hope to be here for years to come. I hope my next review is back up to 5 stars.

Cons

The most significant reasons for the downward trend in experience fall under the "cultural" category. Culture is what has made HC such a great place to work in the past, and it is what has driven the decrease in enjoyment for me as time has gone on. We have gotten more into micro-management. This used to be almost non-existent at HC but has become more and more normal with time and even more significantly as we began to prepare to go public a few years back. More middle management, and management focused processes like PDLC (Product Development Life Cycle) and others have made it increasingly difficult to get things done. I have watched products be delayed and rescheduled for PDLC sessions during periods of over a year. That is not an exaggeration…over a year of people designing, developing, prototyping, testing, re-hashing, and otherwise working on projects while in the meantime PDLC reviews get postponed, rescheduled, pushed off, etc. due to things like executive leadership scheduling difficulties, conflicting managers pushing and pulling things in their preferred directions, and other such types of un-productive activity. Sometimes the cans just keep getting kicked down the road, other times they eventually get crushed and thrown away altogether. Either way we could save ourselves a lot of effort and grief by cutting out some red tape and getting back to letting our smart, hardworking, and humble people build things. Our failure to execute gets very frustrating to those involved in the work. Going public only seems to have made this worse. Leadership trainings and evaluations don't seem to have helped either. We have gone from having a culture of innovation to a culture of acquisition. Acquisition can be a good strategy and, in many aspects may be what we need to take HC to the next stage of success, but in other ways has been a big disappointment. Despite leaders at the top reiterating that they would "absolutely do it again" with regards to all the acquisitions so far, front liners are often left scratching their heads as to why we've bought some solutions instead of building them. We used to focus highly on innovation and hold "innovation days", we don't really do that anymore. Open space is ok, but for most it hasn't been very effective. We're only picking up steam with acquisitions, and the messaging is that we intend to keep that up. I trust most of our executive leadership highly, but I've also seen firsthand where we could have built solutions rather than buy if we were only willing and able to invest in and execute on them like we should. I believe if we had built rather than bought in some cases we would have ended up with a better solution at a lower overall investment. Unfortunately, we seem to drag our feet until it's too late to build and as a result put ourselves in a position where we have to buy to stay competitive. Furthermore, acquisitions seem to be making the micro-management problem discussed above worse. Career progression has been an area of discontent for many HC employees for several years. Despite efforts to address this, it doesn't seem to be improving for most. In several years here I've been selective about positions I've applied for, but 40% of them have been eliminated before ever getting filled, and for the other 60% I've been a finalist but not selected. Always a bridesmaid, never a bride. Despite this I get great feedback and encouragement from my supervisors. So either I'm not really that good and they're just being nice, or something is making it difficult for me to get into positions of interest. There are several "in-groups" here in which enjoy preference not only with opportunities for career advancement, but also for involvement with activities which help prepare for those career advancement opportunities. This has become worse with time. Acquisitions have exacerbated this as well. Besides career advancement, many feel their overall technical abilities get duller with time at HC. I certainly feel less technically capable overall after years of working here and focusing on specific types of work with proprietary tools, and have talked with many coworkers who have experienced the same. HC does encourage personal development in word and with meaningful reimbursement benefits, but in practice that becomes very difficult to juggle work/life/family/etc. In fairness to HC that is not a challenge unique to working here, but somehow I've never found is as difficult to manage as I have here. Timeless Principles selectively applied. HC culture is informed heavily by certain "Timeless Principles" which guide the company ethos. This is a good thing. The principles are good; things like pragmatism, respect, accountability, understanding, caring, assuming positive intent, and more. Where these principles are applied well, they improve the culture at HC. Where they're applied poorly, as they sometimes are at HC, they degrade the culture. Like almost everywhere in today's world, things are getting more tribal with time at HC. Some tribes are given preferential treatment in comparison to others. Some "Timeless Principles" are applied for certain tribes while being applied against others. We've become increasingly selective about the application of our Timeless Principles, making them not so timeless after all. A strange form of moralism has emerged here in which otherwise intolerable behavior is tolerated and even encouraged as a means to desired ends. This is often done with good intentions, usually in the name of equality. If equality is the goal, equality should be the practice, but in some areas of selective application it is neither. On rare occasions the poor application of our Timeless Principles is called out but is usually met with a doubling down on the behavior and a re-statement of the "Timeless Principles" themselves as justification. It is getting much less enjoyable to participate in parts of the culture here, and in ways makes this workplace feel more and more a like a social media platform or some other aggravating influence that you just want to turn off.

avatar
Health Catalyst Response
5y
Thank you for this review and for this candid feedback. I have read your review, then given myself some processing time, and come back and reread your feedback. And I find much in your feedback that resonates and highlights our need to improve. Let me highlight a few in my response, and also share that we'll discuss these as thematic elements in today's All Team Member meeting. First, I apprecaite your feedback regarding innovation vs. scale. This is a constant challenge -- how do we cut red tape, trust team members to make great decisions, be innovative, while also scaling to 10X or 100X our current size? There are no easy answers. When you joined 5-7 years ago, say in 2013, our revenues and number of team members were a very small fraction of what they are today -- we've grown more than 10X since then by some measures. And as we've grown, we've needed to become more scalable and consistent, and less like the "wild, wild west" which is very much how we operated in the early days. But how do we balance the need to scale with the need for continued innovation? This is challenging, and it is an elusive balance to be sure. We will keep this in the forefront of our minds as we kick off the 2021 planning process. I would welcome your direct ideas and feedback and would be happy to schedule time 1:1 so you can better help me understand the tradeoffs you're seeing. Second, related to career progression, I'm also sorry to hear that your personal experience has not lived up to our objective for every team member at Health Catalyst. I'd be happy to visit 1:1 with you to better understand this, and would also be happy as I better understand your situation, to act as an advocate on your behalf as well. I know Linda Llewelyn, our Chief People Officer, would also be happy to visit with you 1:1 to better understand your situation. Third, as it relates to our adherence to timeless principles embedded in the Health Catalyst Way, it is disappointing to hear of several examples you've observed where we fall short. I know that I and others often fall short, as imperfect human beings, and I also recognize when we don't adhere to these principles, negative consequences naturally follow. Non-adherence to the HC Way also erodes the character of the company with each specific action. It is each of our jobs, as team members and fellow owners in the company, to contribute to greater consistency, to call out issues as we see them, and to work to improve, starting with ourselves. Here again, I'd be happy to visit 1:1 privately with you to understand examples you're observing, and then to go to work to improve here. Regarding our acquisition strategy, this is an important and meaty topic, and one we'll continue to discuss in all-team-member meetings. This is another good example of an elusive balance we strive to find between "building" capabiliteis and "buying" those same capabilities. From the company's founding until a few years ago, we spent far more time and investment in the "build" category than in the "buy" category, and I would categorize the results of those investments to have been mixed. There have definitely been some very strong examples of products we've invested in and that have become very valuable to customers and financially sustainable. But there have also been several examples where we have invested millions of dollars on a product that did not meet customers' needs at a financially sustainable level. I would also acknowledge that there have been many positives and challenges related to our acquisitions -- several examples where we've significantly benefitted from acquisitions, and also several examples where we've faced meaningful problems and obstacles and challenges as a result of an acquisition. As we approach 2021 planning, we'll continue to strive to use our annual planning process as an opportunity for us to step back, consider what has occurred during the past year and few years, and be open to acknowledging elements that have gone well, as well as investment areas or focus areas that have underperformed. And then we'll work to adjust based on these learnings and strive towards continuous improvement in 2021 and beyond. I hope that we can make some specific progress in areas you've highlighted, such that in future years your assessment of the company will improve. Thank you for providing this feedback, for contributing to our success, and for hanging in there even through the challenges you've expereinced. I sincerely hope we will become better in the months and years ahead. Best, Dan

Explore other reviews about Health Catalyst

5.0
Jan 30, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Remote work, good pay, wonderful people

Cons

The company grew too big too fast and has been trying to downsize erratically

3.0
May 5, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Great Talent & Culture: The people here are highly capable, collaborative, and committed to helping each other succeed. The partnership between onshore and offshore teams works well and is a real strength. There’s a culture of grit and stability that has helped the company navigate multiple major transitions over the years. Mission-Critical Engineering: The work involves complex data infrastructure that requires deep technical expertise. It can be demanding, but seeing these systems run successfully and support real-world operations is consistently rewarding.

Cons

Wage Compression and Retention Risk: Compensation for tenured and high-performing staff has not kept pace with the market for specialized data engineering and support leadership. In practice, tenure can feel undervalued or even penalized. This creates risk around losing institutional knowledge and operational continuity. Stagnant Career Progression: Contrary to stated expectations, strong performance ratings do not consistently translate into meaningful, market-aligned compensation growth. The process of how compensation is benchmarked lacks clarity in practice, obscuring how compensation decisions are made and what is required to advance.

5
See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All