Engagedly is a cloud-based talent management platform that unifies performance, engagement, learning, growth, and recognition into a single connected experience. With Marissa, its Agentic AI agent, Engagedly aims to turn strategic intent into intelligent actions. Organizations can also use Engagedly to boost engagement, improve retention, and develop high performing teams. Founded in 2015, Engagedly is headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri.
$8,500
per year per installation
PeopleFluent
Score 7.9 out of 10
Enterprise companies (1,001+ employees)
PeopleFluent includes modules for recruiting, performance management, compensation, learning, succession, and vendor management, as well as workforce planning and diversity. These modules can be purchased separately or bundled, and integrate with other HR systems.
N/A
Submittable
Score 8.8 out of 10
N/A
Submittable offers tools to launch, measure, and grow social impact programs, locally and globally. From grants and scholarships to awards and CSR programs, Submittable partners with users to make a difference. The vendor states Submittable has supported over 95,000 social impact programs, receiving nearly 20 million applications, and that teams save an average of 12 hours per week and launch in an average of 14 days.
$10,000
per year
Pricing
Engagedly
PeopleFluent
Submittable
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Engagedly
PeopleFluent
Submittable
Free Trial
Yes
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Yes
Yes
Yes
Entry-level Setup Fee
$1,000 one-time fee per installation (starting cost)
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
Pricing is customized based on the suite/modules implemented and the size of the organization
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Engagedly
PeopleFluent
Submittable
Features
Engagedly
PeopleFluent
Submittable
Performance and Goals
Comparison of Performance and Goals features of Product A and Product B
Engagedly
8.1
16 Ratings
10% above category average
PeopleFluent
8.2
11 Ratings
11% above category average
Submittable
-
Ratings
Corporate goal setting
8.715 Ratings
9.07 Ratings
00 Ratings
Subordinate goal setting
7.713 Ratings
9.06 Ratings
00 Ratings
Individual goal setting
7.015 Ratings
9.09 Ratings
00 Ratings
Line-of sight-visibility
8.010 Ratings
7.09 Ratings
00 Ratings
Performance tracking
9.015 Ratings
7.09 Ratings
00 Ratings
Performance Management
Comparison of Performance Management features of Product A and Product B
Engagedly
8.0
16 Ratings
15% above category average
PeopleFluent
6.5
11 Ratings
5% below category average
Submittable
-
Ratings
Performance plans
9.015 Ratings
7.07 Ratings
00 Ratings
Plan weighting
8.010 Ratings
4.06 Ratings
00 Ratings
Manager note taking
7.315 Ratings
7.04 Ratings
00 Ratings
Performance improvement plans
6.713 Ratings
7.05 Ratings
00 Ratings
Review status tracking
7.714 Ratings
7.07 Ratings
00 Ratings
Rater nomination workflow
8.09 Ratings
7.05 Ratings
00 Ratings
Review reminders
8.315 Ratings
7.05 Ratings
00 Ratings
Workflow restrictions
9.011 Ratings
5.06 Ratings
00 Ratings
Multiple review frequency
9.012 Ratings
7.07 Ratings
00 Ratings
Reporting
7.014 Ratings
7.08 Ratings
00 Ratings
Onboarding
Comparison of Onboarding features of Product A and Product B
Engagedly
-
Ratings
PeopleFluent
8.0
11 Ratings
10% above category average
Submittable
-
Ratings
New hire portal
00 Ratings
7.07 Ratings
00 Ratings
Manager tracking tools
00 Ratings
9.011 Ratings
00 Ratings
Compliance tracking and reporting
00 Ratings
8.08 Ratings
00 Ratings
Succession Planning
Comparison of Succession Planning features of Product A and Product B
Engagedly
-
Ratings
PeopleFluent
6.3
8 Ratings
7% below category average
Submittable
-
Ratings
Create succession plans/pools
00 Ratings
7.05 Ratings
00 Ratings
Candidate ranking
00 Ratings
6.05 Ratings
00 Ratings
Candidate search
00 Ratings
6.08 Ratings
00 Ratings
Candidate development
00 Ratings
6.06 Ratings
00 Ratings
Recruiting / ATS
Comparison of Recruiting / ATS features of Product A and Product B
Engagedly
-
Ratings
PeopleFluent
9.5
8 Ratings
29% above category average
Submittable
-
Ratings
Job Requisition Management
00 Ratings
10.06 Ratings
00 Ratings
Company Website Posting
00 Ratings
10.06 Ratings
00 Ratings
Publish to Social Media
00 Ratings
10.03 Ratings
00 Ratings
Job Search Site Posting
00 Ratings
10.05 Ratings
00 Ratings
Customized Application Form
00 Ratings
10.06 Ratings
00 Ratings
Resume Management
00 Ratings
9.05 Ratings
00 Ratings
Duplicate Candidate Prevention
00 Ratings
6.05 Ratings
00 Ratings
Candidate Search
00 Ratings
9.05 Ratings
00 Ratings
Applicant Tracking
00 Ratings
10.06 Ratings
00 Ratings
Collaboration
00 Ratings
10.04 Ratings
00 Ratings
Task Creation and Delegation
00 Ratings
10.03 Ratings
00 Ratings
Email Templates
00 Ratings
10.05 Ratings
00 Ratings
User Permissions
00 Ratings
9.06 Ratings
00 Ratings
Notifications and Alerts
00 Ratings
9.06 Ratings
00 Ratings
Reporting
00 Ratings
10.05 Ratings
00 Ratings
Learning Management
Comparison of Learning Management features of Product A and Product B
Engagedly has a huge range of possibilities and we chose it because of all the functionalities it offers. I'm not marking my rating a 9 or 10 because of the UI. If you're an active user (e.g. in the people department) then you get used to the UI fast enough. However, if you only use it twice per year (like all our other users) it can be difficult to find what you need. That being said, Engagedly offers a truly broad range of HR-related functionalities and we're very happy about that!
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.
Submittable is great for grant management, grantmaking, and scholarship awards. It's a very useful tool also when there are multiple reviewers and committees involved in the assessment of the application. The table feature is helpful, but to download the information in a usable report is a pain. Overall a very useful tool for funding.
It was very easy to go through resumes, choose the people you wanted to interview and set up the interviews.
It is great at keeping track of people that have come through hiring process in the past so you do not waste time on those that have already been declined or are sent in by multiple vendors.
The handling of time sheets and expense reports is very easy to manage.
Form-logic: Allows application forms to adjust based on answers to crucial questions (if-then-else) so that all applications don't have to see extended questions that may not apply to them or their situation.
Messaging Platform: This platform allows interactions with applicants or internal review teams to be associated with the specific submission, allowing for an easier, complete view of an application being considered and as an audit trail.
Good Voting/Polling Management: It makes it easier to record the latest vote/feedback from assigned team members and allows customization of the vote/feedback review as a form. It also summarizes the votes for easy review in a submissions dashboard view.
The interface is a little confusing. I'm not sure if it's something that can be fixed in implementations, or if it's inherent to PeopleFluent, but there are almost too many tabs asking for too much information. A lot of it can be repetitive as well.
Changing your password/resetting your password seems to be nightmarish. It requires an organization ID as well as security questions, and forces you to reset your password far too often. I really dislike that feature.
Honestly, PeopleFluent itself looks pretty outdated. I feel as though the entire application really needs a facelift to be more current.
We are some of the earliest users of employee volunteerism, so there have been some things to work out. However, because of that, we've gotten a lot of one-on-one support to help make minor tweaks to the system in a way that works for us.
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.
We use this software annually to help with our grant processes. Without it, I'd be so lost! Our team relies on the data from our past years to sift applications and we try to prioritize those who have applied and been a finalist but perhaps didn't win in years prior
The amount of features available is a lot, but they are hard to navigate due to the UI not being on par with them. Still if used properly, Engagedly is useful to keep track of multiple individuals and their personal goals.
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?
A submittable requires a great deal of thought to set up. It would be best if you really did an outline and flowcharting. Once you have a detailed plan and set up the system, you have to think of the process that you would manually do step-by-step to deal with the what-ifs; it’s beautiful. The ability to Clone events is invaluable. The onboarding can be complex, but the ease of use afterward is worth it.
We have thankfully never experienced an outage nor been affected by a technology issue on Submittable's side that has delayed our grant process. We have instead been able to distribute over $6M in donated dollars to AAPI small business owners because Submittable is trustworthy and available
We've had a quick and efficient submittable experience that has always been easy to use. When we need a report it downloads within seconds, even the larger reports are 30 seconds or less to download. Pages are quick to load and reports complete in a more than reasonable time frame
Absolutely! We love engagedly because we haven't faced any kind of lagging or such issues in website. It also has a convenient app through which you can access everything. They are very polite and address to each and every query relating to software which may cause hinderence in the process.
I would rate this ATS system a 9 as there's some room for improvement as mentioned prior. I really love the design and its functionality buttons and the way I can integrate it with other systems. I would really love to see a more detailed reporting metrics long with super candidate filters when searching profiles.
I think that they are good at answering our questions and solving our problems. We occasionally get reports from applicants about problems the Submittable team has not solved, but I do not know what the applicant has done to get the problem solved.
We have been using this for many years but my memory is that we had a human walk us through how to use basic features. We also used the resource library to learn about specific topics or issues as they came up.
10/10 because we were able to meet virtually and still get all of our questions answered! Online was effective too because we could easily record the sessions and review them later. Since we had to onboard our reviewers virtually, it was actually convenient that this was the same method we learned how to use the entire program virtually too.
I would say, provide Submittable as much detailed information on your planned use of the platform and your desires with the platform as possible, and the implementation will be tailored to accommodate your organization with minimal lag time and issues/problems.
We used SharePoint Forms to make customized forms for ourselves but it did not work well. Our IT needed to build a system from scratch with a help of an external developer team and they were simply not capable of creating something that complicated. Engagedly already has a great platform and it was a life saver for us that we can just start using after the streamlined implementation period for a brief period of time. With SharePoint, we kept having weekly meetings for over 1.5 years to fix bugs, add necessary functions, etc. after the implementation.
Its great, its very versatile and stacks up very well against the competition. In terms of usability and ease of use, anyone can quickly learn how to use PeopleFluent. Again, the faults against the system would be when a client who is running the tool customizes it to their liking. Not to mention it's a very popular tool that i have had the pleasure of working in twice now with two different organizations.
Submittable isn't in the same league as these other platforms. It's trying to get there but it's been a rocky road. Neither customer support nor the account people we've dealt with at Submittable seem particularly knowledgeable about how the product actually works for foundations and can't provide detailed recommendations for how to use the product more effectively. The decision to use Submittable was made before I came on board. We are moving to another platform next year, probably SmartSimple.
I wish we could choose our own number of applications we want for the year and have the price be changed because we are in-between buyable numbers and always have to add more applications at the end of the year
We have been easily able to grow. Not only are we able to process different applications, but Submittable makes it easy to add applications onto our plan. Additionally, their eligibility form before the application does a good job of screening applicants so we do not pay for extra applications.
We haven't used it long enough to calculate ROI (YET), but - we've had EEs who never engaged with performance management before who are excited to use the program
It has already provided a better framework to set up goals for our teams
Neg impact - limited feed of info from HRIS - requires some manual data to uploaded.
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.