Brassring vs. PeopleFluent

Kenexa is is well suited for any organization that has more than 3000 employees globally. I would not recommend this to startups or a growing organization with less than 3000 employees. But once you cross this number, Kenexa becomes useful and is a brilliant tool for global operations - recruiting. I would recommend this tool to any organization that has offices in many countries/geographies as well.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

• Kenexa allows Boolean key word search within a particular requisition so it makes sifting through a high number of applicants manageable and effective
• Kenexa can be tailored to meet individual business needs. During the time we’ve had Kenexa here I’ve used it in support of a few different business segments and for each the way the system was used to “position” candidate statuses have varied based on the individual need of the business. One example is when interviewing a high volume of applicants internationally, we were able to send qualified applicants through to the “event manager” and it would enable the candidate to select his/her interview date/time based on previously submitted options inputted by our Kenexa users.
• Kenexa allows one to customize and score questions for each open requisition that applicants complete as they apply. The system then sorts applicants according to the score of candidate answers allowing for easy sorting of top qualified candidates.

• 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.

• BrassRing's application system for candidates is prone to freezing and crashing in the middle of the application causing potential candidates to lose all progress. I filled out the application myself and witnessed these issues first hand, on top of several complaints I received via phone and email from candidates attempting to apply via the BrassRing service. Also, the Parsing system within the application is not capable of pulling any meaningful information out of text documents.
• Each user must be added to each job in order for that job, and the candidates in it, to show up in relevant searches. This becomes a problem when a new team member joins the account and needs access to all of the previous openings just so that they can find candidates already in the system. The account I was working on involved literally hundreds of new openings a month, meaning that any movement of personnel on or off the account would mean having to update potentially thousands of old positions just to allow them to be able to mine the ATS for candidates. I don't see any particular reason why someone with access to the system should have to be given access to each individual job. If a particular position needs to be kept confidential for whatever reason then that individual position should be able to be set to only show to authorized recruiters. The rest of the positions should automatically be searchable by anyone with appropriate access to the ATS to allow for basic level candidate mining and movement.

• 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.

Incentivized

I am confident that the Kenexa product will continue to evolve to meet the needs of our business in an ever changing work environment. The affiliation with IBM also plays a factor as we have a long standing successful relationship with IBM products. We will be looking to integrate other Kenexa products in the near future to streamline our HR processes.

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.

I feel like I am pretty decent with computers and systems. It was fairly easy to use it after about a week or two . But I have seen people struggle with it as well as some people not use it at all. It can be slow at times and not work at times. But Its a fine system.

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?

Incentivized

Just slow for what we are doing here

It is a very basic system. It may be OK for entry level positions only. The practice of removing CVs while the recruitment process is ON is disturbing and there is no one to explain or to inform why it is being done. Even a routine mail is not sent to the client/consultant. I am surprised how this system is continuing without too many complaints.

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.

Incentivized

We purchased an out of the box solution and that worked well for us.

Incentivized

SF ATS was not available at the time and Taleo was thought to be too expensive. In retrospect, given the amount of customization and leveraging of other vendor technology for things like analytics I suspect any cost advantage we realized evaporated

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

• Kenexa has assisted us in identifying top talent within our target market of applicants.
• Kenexa may exclude potentially good associates that don't test well.
• Kenexa clearly defines specific categories and general notes for training, development, & coaching of associates on areas of opportunity.

Incentivized

• 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.

Incentivized