Weak, volatile leadership. Orbis Global was the most disappointing company choice of my career. - Sales Executive Infor Employee Review

1.0
Jan 22, 2013
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Recently bought by Infor, so, hopefully many of the management problems will disappear Great location in the financial district, San Francisco Decent (theoretical) pay Product that is a “leader in the Gartner Magic Quadrant for MRM (marketing resource management)” Handful of Fortune 5000 companies as customers

Cons

Weak, volatile leadership. Borderline abusive management practices, in my opinion. 13 years in business without a proper sales team says something. Somewhat 'Smoke-and-mirrors product'; based upon outdated Microsoft technologies Weak infrastructure, no operations management. No training what-so-ever. Sink or swim. Employees are generally miserable, and looking for way out.

Explore other reviews about Infor

5.0
May 5, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Great company to work for. Flexible. Great mentors and access to leadership.

Cons

Leadership changes frequently Infor has a few "focus" industries - its best to be in one of those lines of business if you want to maximize sales compensation.

avatar
Infor Response
3w
Thank you for your review. We’re delighted to hear about your positive experience with us.​ ​ We are the forefront of industry trends and emerging technologies, ensuring our people constantly have new opportunities to learn, grow, and accelerate their careers. ​
3.0
May 22, 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

I like working at Infor. I’ve been here for roughly five years. I enjoy the work, believe in the product, and genuinely like the people I work with and for.

Cons

There has recently been a very strong “AI-first” push across the company. To be clear, I understand the value. AI absolutely can streamline operations and free people up to focus on higher-value work. Used correctly, it’s useful. The problem is that there does not appear to be a clear or consistently enforced policy around what constitutes appropriate use versus misuse or outright abuse. There should be better guidance around where AI helps productivity, where it introduces risk (especially around company information being entered into public tools), and where the line is between use and replacement of basic job responsibilities. For example, I recently had a coworker explain that they created AI automation to read and manage their emails so they rarely have to review or respond themselves, while acknowledging things are likely missed. The same person records meetings for transcripts, leaves their laptop during the call, then relies on AI afterward to summarize what happened. At a certain point, it raises a legitimate question: are we using AI to improve productivity, or are we using it to avoid participating in the job altogether? Right now, reactions internally seem split. Some employees view this as a serious abuse of the technology, while others appear fully on board with it. That disconnect alone suggests the company needs clearer expectations and policy guidance. AI should support human judgment and critical thinking. Not eliminate the need for employees to engage in their work entirely. And how does the company determine when that is being done?

avatar
Infor Response
3w
At this time of change, growth, and continuous improvement, our employees are encouraged to speak up if they see an opportunity to make our ways of working better. Please send your feedback to myfeedback@infor.com so we can better understand your concern.
See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All