Lever vs. PeopleFluent

Managing pipeline and candidate communication is easy through lever. Keeping it all in one place allows the hiring teams to be in the loop real-time. The reporting is clunky and basic, however, and without a 3rd party tool, sourcing from the lever database is difficult. Also, it is very easy to have duplicate candidates since the alerts Lever gives are often incorrect

Incentivized

PeopleFluent has eliminated the use of paper reviews. It is also eliminated the use of scanning, emailing or interoffice mail. It is a great tool for communication and I highly recommend it. However, in some ways, the product can be improved. Some processes are tied to each other and could function in tandem. For example, while completing the self-review, the employee has to capture multi-raters. If self-review is submitted without listing multi-rater names then multi-rater review has to be captured separately on paper. In my opinion, these two processes can be different. Multi-raters should be added/removed/modified after submitting self-review.

Incentivized

• Great integration: Keeps a list of Outlook email communication along with LinkedIn and other data sources
• Is fairly lively, not too much lag between screens even though it is looking through a lot of data.
• Has excellent reporting on how well each email message is working.

Incentivized

• Self-service tool to add/change configurations without the need for additional professional services
• Amazing implementation team that makes sure your tool is up and running
• Reporting such as compensation statements, budget and total rewards statements available for all cycles
• Configurable feed to our HRIS to make sure data is up to date
• Opportunity to leverage the current tool capabilities within the comp module for other comp processes (e.g. Total Rewards Statements)
• Customer support team is great!

Incentivized

• It would be nice if we were provided a more detailed summary of why our referrals were not selected for a position.
• The feedback feature that interviewers can give on candidates is great, but it is sometimes hard to find again after completion.
• If there is a mobile version, better marketing/awareness on this would be helpful.

Incentivized

• I would advise better filtering options when pulling up candidate profiles, we should have multiple functions when requesting candidates profile.
• Sometimes I get huge projects and need to move more than 20 people, it's a headache moving groups in parts.
• A faster way to verify if a candidate has been double submitted, maybe with a unique ID or email that identifies said candidate prior to going through the whole submission process.
• Stronger cache cookies when session is timed out get kicked out and the process reboots. Sometimes recruiters are pulled in different directions while multitasking.

Incentivized

PeopleFluent continues to develop an already high quality product and works to continually improve the user experience. The different modules integrate well, and the administrative functions are easy to understand and perform resulting in less time spent with KTLO functions. They provide world class customer service and work hard to keep you engaged as a customer.

It isn't difficult to use for the applicant processing, but [I feel] if you want to pull reports or use their tools, good luck!

PeopleFluent seems to have all the functionality one would need, but it can be a bit overwhelming. Depending on the client implementation, it can be downright confusing and not intuitive. My 6 rating comes from the fact that it seems like the system can be configured to actually be confusing and not make sense. I think a VMS should be set up not to allow a customer to configure it in such a way as to not really work, or to allow users to circumvent steps. I also really don't like the "organization key" that needs to be entered every time you log in. Why is a login and password good enough for 99% of the systems out there, but PeopleFluent requires an extra field?

Incentivized

What support? - Add a ticket and get links to [I believe] their unhelpful user guide. Add a charge if you want better support - afterward just got those links faster...

In my experience, the support team was very prompt and helpful. They had good subject matter expertise and were able to troubleshoot immediately. At times we wanted some enhancements but it was not possible due to product limitations. But, the support team was helpful in suggesting alternatives for our requirements. The customer support staff was also very polite and friendly.

Incentivized

I think Lever stacks up fairly well and is right above the midpoint. iCIMS and Greenhouse provide a larger, more Enterprise style product for huge scale, so I'd put the two of them above Lever at this time, but we chose Lever over Greenhouse for a reason. I just don't know if we'd be able to scale to the size we'd want to long-term with their product suite. Compared to the others listed here, and many others, I would take Lever every time.

Incentivized

Out of the VMS's listed, I'd say PeopleFluent is solidly in the middle. Fieldglass and IQN are probably easier to navigate and more modern looking, and I definitely don't run into the login problems with them. Beeline and PRO Wand are probably on par with PeopleFluent. They have their plusses and minuses in terms of navigation and ease of use. Covendis is definitely worse than PeopleFluent. Covendis is a mess - very difficult to navigate, not intuitive at all with terrible workflow. Again, I didn't select PeopleFluent; my client did, and I have chosen to work with them, therefore I work with PeopleFluent.

Incentivized

• We have an ATS now and did not have one before
• LinkedIn integration is better than others I've seen
• Spend too much time researching unhelpful user guides since their support is terrible
• Lots of frustration with post implementation support
• Integrations break, tools don't work and settings fail which could lead to other issues

• I do believe that goal setting and the workflow of following up, going through the process yearly is as good as you make it. If you set good goals, or help your team make good goals then the experience can go well. Otherwise it's just another thing that an employee is doing to make their manager happy.
• I am not sure the cost of the product, but if it is really expensive I am not sure that we are getting fully what we should be for what the product offers. Make sure you are using what is offered.

Incentivized