PRO Unlimited headquarted in Boca Raton, Florida offers the Wand Vendor Management System (VMS), a workforce management system for a contingent workforce.
Staffing Manager in Sales at PEAK Technical Staffing USA (Staffing and Recruiting, 501-1000 employees)
Chose PRO Unlimited Wand VMS
In our current situation, we did not go after WAND as a tool. Our clients that we support currently use WAND as their VMS system. But if given a choice of having to choose a VMS I would choose WAND over all that I have used in the past. It keeps everything uniform.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Recruiting Manager in Human Resources at Quantix, Inc. (Staffing and Recruiting, 51-200 employees)
Chose PRO Unlimited Wand VMS
Again, I didn't specifically select the Wand system; our client selected it, and I work with it. However, I have used several VMSs as well, so I feel as though I can compare from a user perspective. Wand isn't great - I prefer Fieldglass for sure, mostly for it's simplicity. IQN…
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
When working with a VMS or MSP I must say PRO is one of the best to use. You are able to manage multiple clients within the same portal, very user-friendly, able to go to one location for all recruitment needs, management needs, sales and accounting needs. It helps organize recruitment needs and make sure that candidates are within budget. With this program, I do not have to worry about aging reports or outstanding invoices
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
As compared to other VMSs out there, Wand does allow for more information to be entered. In particular, I don't like when there are little to no free-form fields in a VMS, as you cannot truly explain a candidate's experiences without free-form entry.
Notifications actually explain what is happening. Some VMSs send notifications that require you to login to see the activity. It's nice to see the info come directly to me in an email.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Again, I didn't specifically select the Wand system; our client selected it, and I work with it. However, I have used several VMSs as well, so I feel as though I can compare from a user perspective. Wand isn't great - I prefer Fieldglass for sure, mostly for it's simplicity. IQNavigator, Beeline, and PeopleFluent are all similar to Wand in that they tend to be over-complicated, with a lot of steps involved in the submittal process that aren't relevant to the hiring process. And none are all that intuitive. However, in my experience, the people at PRO are top-notch, and more helpful than almost any others from other VMSs with whom I have worked. I'm not sure if that is strictly a function of the client environment, or PRO itself, but it's worth remarking on.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Only negative is that there is not a real connection with the managers from a Recruitment or Sales point of view - but understand they are prob bombarded by sales calls
Very helpful tool to keep process and procedures in place
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
