Greenhouse delivers a solution to help companies hire for what's next. Their hiring platform has users at companies like DoorDash, Dropbox and Wayfair, who use Greenhouse's intelligent guidance to design and automate all aspects of hiring.
N/A
Workday HCM
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
Workday Human Capital Management is built as a cloud-based system with global consistency in user experience. Workday HCM is part of a broader system with other Workday products.
Even though Zendesk and Workday is not applicant tracking platform, I would like to compare the security aspect of these platforms. Greenhouse in a way is similar to Zendesk. There are options that allow the admin to select. For example, allowing a user to create a job or …
I prefer Greenhouse to Workday's built-in talent tool as Greenhouse is significantly more intuitive and easier to use. Our whole recruiting team prefers Greenhouse.
Greenhouse has mastered the ATS tool and continuously improves features based on soliciting feedback from their customers. They do a great job at listening and adjusting based on the growing needs of their customers in the talent management space.
Greenhouse has a very reasonable price for various organization sizes. It's intuitive to use and provides decent reporting. It's much better than Success Factors, Lever, or ZipRecruiter. ZipRecruiter is fine for very small businesses..but it doesn't allow organization or …
I can compare against Workday and Oracle. I like Greenhouse's ease of use and simplicity, but from an analytics, reporting and automation standpoint, Workday is far superior.
Greenhouse doesn't even compare to these other systems. I was a recruiter in a past life, and I can say that even as an end user of Greenhouse now (strictly for interviews)...it is far superior to the other comparable systems out there. Greenhouse is user friendly, the UI is …
Greenhouse is the best ATS I have used in my career. Particularly from a user interface, collaboration, and feature set standpoint. I highly recommend it for rapid growing companies.
There are a lot of functions of Workday that we choose to manage over Confluence (our internal wiki). Not sure if this is better or worse but its a choice we've made. They both have not good search functionality so thats something could benefit from.
We chose Workday HCM due to the innovative nature of the company and the clean and easy to use interface. It's really leaps and bounds ahead of Oracle -- the major other incumbent in the space. We are really please with Workday -- the only complaint being the price.
Well suited for Big organizations where recruitment is a daily task. Understanding of Greenhouse workings is simple and it is not difficult to train people who use it for first time. Greenhouse is less appropriate if you are looking for sharing offer letters or doing employee onboarding. Did not had a great experience in doing that
Workday human capital management is well suited for organizations to manage their employee records. It is also well suited for managing the employee's salary details, also the details of past salary changes, promotions, etc. It has options to keep track of employees' goals for the year, where they can keep track of their progress, and also managers can view the progress or share feedback. This is very helpful for tracking career progress and providing feedback. Other options, like training assigned to employees, can also be seen in Workday; users will get alerts by email for any new assignments or due assignments, etc.
Groups employees in management hierarchies and creates Org Charts that are easy to navigate and allow for visualizing management chains regardless of employee locations
Intuitive and easy to use. The Workday search functionality works very much like Google; one can search for anything that they have access to in the database and drill down into the various details. All information is connected through hyperlinks and users can easily keep digging into the details for as far as their security access would take them.
Tasks such as to do, review or approve items are sent to the user's Workday Inbox, very much resembling email. Notifications about outstanding "to do" items are also sent to each the user's work email address on a daily basis.
Greenhouse Security is simple, but not that granular. For example, everytime new recruiter joins, we have to give them access manually one by one. There is no one click or an easy way to auto assign security unlike other systems that we use such as Workday.
Greenhouse reporting is very lacking. Even though we are on the highest tier, we cannot extract data through this delivered feature. For example, scorecard custom questions. We have to do this through SQL.
Greenhouse Audit Log is also lacking. It is not useful at all. We cannot even see what job info changed and who changed it even though we are on the highest tier now.
It is work to make one system the source of truth for our data, but now that it is done, there is less work involved in staying on this path. This means for us that maintaining and/or implementing new modules like performance, finance, talent, etc. is simple. It's a no-brainer
Greenhouse's user-friendly interface, efficient workflows, and integration capabilities with other HR tools make it a powerful tool for our company, helping us streamline our hiring and onboarding processes. With its customizable workflow and intuitive design, Greenhouse allows us to create a hiring process that suits their specific needs and requirements, without the need for extensive coding or technical expertise. Moreover, Greenhouse's integration capabilities with other HR tools enable us to centralise our hiring and onboarding data, making it easier to access and analyse applicant information, and reducing the risk of data loss or errors.
Workday's on a great path in terms of user experience. Their goals is to deliver a use experience that doesn't require training or instruction, like Amazon on the consumer side for example. That's hard to do when you're talking about complex business processes and important and sensitive employee information, but they're doing it well
In 2014, Workday has changed the update process. There will be two updates a year; the updates will be delivered to customers typically in a 24 hour window during these two weekends a year. They also keep the Community up-to-date about any planned outages, etc. There is weekly scheduled downtime on Friday night.
From my perspective, the system runs like a well oiled machine and I have not had any issues with customers complaining about speed. If a report is taking long to run, the report can run in the background and you can go about your business. For larger enterprises, there is additional space and machines to process the application in what Workday refers to it as Extended Configuration Tenant
I have never needed to call Greenhouse for support. I am not the primary account holder, nor do I use Greenhouse enough to merit calling support. I delegate that responsibility to the Recruiting team. They have never mentioned any experience with Greenhouse technical support, either bad or good. I would assume that they would tell me if the support was poor.
Workday is still learning about the needs of higher education. I have seen rapid improvement in support and knowledge over the last year so am confident this will continue to improve. Overall however, I have found the Support Team to be extremely responsive and Workday offers the advantage of having support across several timezones so that we never wait more than a few hours for a response.
Some training is offered online. Cost is per-person. This also gets quite expensive. Training doesn’t follow a logical path A to B. Starts in middle. When you try to do it afterwards at your desk, difficult. • Training scenarios are not very real
I have done for report writing and mass imports (EIBs). They give materials and you run through examples, i.e. you don’t just watch them do tasks, so that is helpful. Training is expensive – a single reporting writing class is $600 per person for virtual training
It was implemented before my joining the company. At my last company, we used Workday professional services.
Based upon my experience at my last company, I would rate the implementation experience an 8/10. There are different ways to set things up and we had different people telling us different things. It set us back a couple of times.
Regarding configuration advice, we could set things up where every manager has supervisory organizations, or have it financially based i.e. aligned to cost center/department. We chose the individual manager path and I think we should have chosen a department route. Going down the individual manager path, to maintain the information, we have to inactivate a supervisory org whenever a manager changes/leaves.
Tools appears very light to use. It does not take forever to load. the interface is very simple but capable, unlike many ATS's. The tools is Simple yet loaded with very useful functionalities that save a lot of time and expedites the processes. For different stakeholders, the tools works accordingly.
Unfortunately, I do not recall the brands of the other human capital management software programs or tools I used at my current company or workplaces prior. I do think that is a testament to Workday with its strong branding and compelling features. I was not part of the selection process of Workday but have enjoyed my experience.
Workday has released Financials and is continuing to develop it's Human Capital Management footprint with the addition of Workday Recruiting. I think customers will find that is easy to add on additional functionality in the system. Workday does make it easy for customers to make changes without relying on IT resources. The Business Process framework is a visual tool that allows functional resources to make changes and see the flow of the transaction
Positive ROI, we were one of the first organizations that went with Workday HCM, and we received numerous discounts. Cloud systems are the way to go and we feel the system is stable for our growing work force.
The user conferences have been helpful to network and learn more deepness in the modules and functionality.
Right off the bat, our implementation costs were lower than budgeted and we had less 'billing' surprises.
