Guru.com vs. Turing.com

VERY useful for small companies where one person does an entire job/task. May be less useful for larger companies, as it would be difficult to maintain, and there are usually teams to cover the slack. Also good for tech purposes. Our tech people constantly create Guru cards in order to help us learn to do back-end things.

Incentivized

I would rate Turing much higher if they had viable candidates that were US residents. Their candidates are qualified, but unusable in most companies.

Incentivized

• The segmentation of information into Collections, boards and individual cards allows you to keep a good control and organization of information contained within.
• An add-on app for Slack and a Chrome extension mean you don't even need to have the Guru.com site open to still be able to access all of your stored information.
• The ability to allow some or all users to create & edit cards adds value and strengthens the team collaboration.

Incentivized

• They are very transparent.
• They were very informative with their vetting process.
• They have very qualified candidates, but not in the United States.

Incentivized

• Relatively high fees taken out of earnings
• Fake clients still get through, which causes a headache
• Having to pay to get your bid higher up in the list of freelancers makes it even more costly

Incentivized

• Turing needs to provide US candidates.
• They need to be more transparent in their advertising.
• They need to provide more viable options.

Incentivized

Honestly, As I stated, Turing was a total waste of my and my company's time. We cannot employ outside of the US or Canada, even though an agency like this. If they were upfront about what they truly are, and overseas employment agency, I would have never signed up for it.

Incentivized

• Great for resolving tech related issues.
• Great for cross-training.

Incentivized

• Honestly, none.
• Turing was a complete waste of my and my company's time. Nothing they did but they were not transparent upfront on the residency of their developers.

Incentivized