Pros
1. The agile methodology is a breath of fresh air compared to the waterfall they used to operate under. 2. Their software is using some pretty old technology, but they have meetings to practice and discuss newer technology and they occasionally bring them into operation if management likes it. 3. They seem generally interested in hearing employees concerns and addressing them. 4. Annual bonus is nice if you get a good review.
Cons
Working late is expected if your team needs to meet a sprint commitment. The 70/20/10 rule is used for performance reviews. I usually land in the 70%, and once or twice in the 20% high ranks, but each time the reviews come around, there is a lot of anxiety and self doubt. The way it works is your manager has to advocate on your behalf in a big meeting and convince everyone else of your value. You are compared against all other employees with the same rank as you. If your manager isn't very persuasive, even if you are one of the best employees, you could end up in the bottom 10%. Also, a manager who is a great salesman could sell a bad employee into the 70% pretty easily. So rather than measuring employees to get rid of the worst 10%, they are really just punishing employees who work under a bad manager. This model seems to really highlight the old saying, "A team is only as good as their manager". Also, the system also seems to encourage leaving coworkers out to fail publicly so that you can get a leg up on them in the next review session. I've never done it, but I can see the strategy working for some. Because its agile, you have an incentive to keep your team mates on track, but there is no incentive to help Joe from the other team.