Hire, by Google, was a recruiting app for G suite customers. The product includes functionality for applicant tracking, candidate relationship management, and candidate sourcing. Google sunsetted the product in late 2020.
N/A
LinkedIn Talent Hub
Score 7.8 out of 10
N/A
LinkedIn Talent is a recruiting solution. It offers core ATS capabilities, as well as proactive recruitment outreach tailored to LinkedIn’s site. LinkedIn Talent also enables competitive insights and recruitment marketing.
Google Hire is very good at doing the basics well. I believe for most internal HR departments at small companies, this is all you need. It also works well for small to medium-sized staffing companies that just want something reliable and easy to use. What Google Hire doesn't do very well is be flexible. They don't have custom options, they don't have a ton of settings, and their development cycle is slow. As a result, it's pretty much what you see is what you get.
I really feel like [LinkedIn Talent Hub] has great potential to be used by many many companies. I think if it is made a little more user friendly with a little more development on the back end to remove some bugs, this could be a potential game changer. I have enjoyed working and getting to know this.
Google does search well so when I search through our database for candidates, I'm confident that I'm pulling up all the right people from what we have.
They have a modern and nice user interface - this is one of the biggest reasons to use it over other systems, as most ATS' are pretty ancient looking and not very pleasant to use.
Their support is very good at answering and addressing questions.
Their pricing is incredible. I'm sure at some point it will change, but for small companies paying 100+ per user for other ATS' - it's incredible to pay 100/month for the whole company.
Source of talent - LinkedIn has become the #1 place to engage talent.
Targeting / advertising / sponsoring employment ads are very effective. They are costly, but effective.
Connecting with talent via InMails and ability to send InMails to a pretty targeted audience with ease is great. This allows you to reach out/connect fast with people that "fit" what you are looking for. Other sites for recruiting, etc. are hit and miss. The quality of results is the strongest on LinkedIn and has been for many, many years.
Despite many many months of requests, Google still hasn't implemented ANY custom fields. This makes it tough for an external recruiting firm to track what they want (most importantly: desired salary).
The job board integration is not great for external recruiters, mostly at the fault of Indeed. Indeed flagged us as a recruiting firm and so none of our jobs actually go live. While I know this is an Indeed problem (we had the same problem when using Bullhorn), Breezy ATS never has that problem for us so I don't know what they're doing differently.
Their development cycles are quite frankly very slow. I've requested some features, and while support is great about telling me it's coming or in the pipeline, I honestly don't really see a difference in the product since we started using it. It's still great to use, and we still love the software, but there haven't been too many visible improvements that make any difference to our work.
Being Google, it can sometimes be frustrating that one arm doesn't talk to the other. For example, they announced a Gmail for Works App/Extension integration, but for some reason when they launched it, admins of a domain couldn't install it. Google Hire pointed to the Google for Works team, and it took literally months to fix. Not the end of the world, but just very silly considering they're the same company.
Reporting. Major lacking here. If a job is closed then reopened (which that feature was recently removed), all reporting is wiped clean and picked back up with the "reopen" date. So it doesn't give a full history of the job activity.
Lacks adequate approvals in the system.
If you're a company with a risk of audits, I would not recommend Talent Hub. They lack compliance: the system allows us to "hire" someone who never applied to the job. Req history could be incomplete with the way reporting functions are set up. The system puts passive "sourced" candidates and applicants in the same bucket for pipeline workflows. Disposition status is inadequate and greatly lacking, etc.
Dashboard is not customizable.
We do not have our own unique req IDs. The system generates project IDs but these numbers are shared with all their clients, they're not unique to Ora so they are somewhat random and not in order.
They do not differentiate between a networking project and an approved requisition.
Although we never experienced any issues with the LinkedIn Talent platform or required any support, we always knew in the event that we did need assistance, it was readily available. LinkedIn as a whole is always very supportive and responsive whenever I've had any issues or even a simple question in the past. I'm sure anyone experiencing difficulties with the platform would have a resolution from the support team just about instantly.
I picked Google Hire after spending about 3 months on Bullhorn. I found Bullhorn to be terrible. It's WAY more customizable and theoretically powerful, but it's also a pain to set up and maintain. Even just getting your job page set up on your own site required tech support. Getting it eventually to what you want could be a great benefit, but Google Hire does great right out of the box and is a lot cheaper. Breezy HR is a great system. It's a bit more expensive than Google Hire for multiple job postings, but their system is equally easy to use and straight forward. However, we are all in on Google Products, so it was just a no brainer to go with Hire for a better price and most likely a better search function.
It's definitely better than other competitors because of one a better pool of candidates, who are well categorised and filtered, and the database is well updated. Also, it has a better UI with end to end hiring requirement management, that helps to make hiring faster and smarter. The UX though is a bit laggy, which can be improved
Google Hire makes, unfortunately, a very little impact on our ROI, but I think in the ATS world that's a good thing. It simply acts as a record that we can put everything in and easily reference, and the fact that it works overall makes it a positive software product in the long run.
While the search works great, I don't know that I've ever specifically found a candidate and placed them due to it. That could be a result of our job reqs though.
The biggest most obvious impact is really just the price. We needed a tool that does what Google Hire does, reliably. Most other companies charge at least 150 or so for 2 people, whereas Google Hire is 100/month for many users. It gives us flexibility for the future and helps minimize what could be a big expense. That definitely helps our bottom line.
Positive impact. The tool has helped us in finding quality candidates for our hard to fill positions!
Helps in “pipelining” even after we fill a position, we make a folder of prospective candidates that we find through the platform. This list is then revisited once we have additional positions!
Outreach to global candidates. We have an office in Spain and we have found so many qualified candidates on the platform to fill those positions!
