Likelihood to Recommend 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.
Read full review Organizations who have very few applications and/or very few positions posted are probably less likely to benefit as high from PeopleAdmin. Large organizations who have several positions and/or several applications/applicants can definitely benefit from this product. This product is not as well suited for performance management as I had hoped because there is not a lot of freedom to creating and designing different evaluations for different position types in the system when you have an organization that has thousands of different employees and types.
Read full review Pros 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. Read full review Applicant tracking was a good use of this tool for our department. I think it could use a few more customization features but overall it was a good tool to weed out applicants who were not qualified for the position. The system has some canned reporting tools that also worked well for our department and management needs. It was a great place to house our position descriptions and provided a readily accessible source for hiring managers to make requested updates and changes and for employees to see and have access to their position descriptions. Read full review Cons 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. There's more, too many to list. Read full review PeopleAdmin's internal report writer needs work. Currently, in version 7, reporting can only be done requisition number by requisition number. The report writer needs to be modified so it can create reports enterprise-wide. PeopleAdmin's Data Mart product needs substantial modification. In version 5.8, on a monthly basis, PeopleAdmin provided us with an Microsoft Access database containing our historical data up to that period end. In version 7, the "Data Mart" contains our historical data. The Data Mart consists of over 300 files. These files are not database table downloads nor is it parts of a database data dump. Rather, the files appear to be scrapes from html pages. They contain html codes and other character data that needs to be cleaned before they can be uploaded. The files are not in a table-by-table format. Any one file can contain data from two or more tables. The format of the Data Mart makes it difficult to load the data into a database and format it in a table structure that is comparable to the Access database provided with version 5.8. Read full review Likelihood to Renew We are evaluating our options as it relates to PeopleAdmin. We are likely to renew as we can not find another product that gives us the functionality we have with PeopleAdmin 5.8 in the area of Position Description. Outside of that, we would likely be close to finding another product solution.
Read full review Support Rating 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.
Read full review Alternatives Considered 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
Read full review I've used both Target Recruit and HR Smart. When working with Target Recruit it quickly became apparent it was not the right solution for us. Another solution we examined prior to selection PeopleAdmin was iCIMS. iCIMS is a very social system but was not as familiar with the Higher Education recruitment processes as was PeopleAdmin.
Read full review Return on Investment 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! Avni Shah Senior Talent Partner- HR Operations
Read full review We are now able to track our recruitment sources to determine our ROI on university paid subscriptions. We have reduced our recruiting approval review times by 50% We have identified areas for improvement substancially by having robust reporting available at our fingertips. Read full review ScreenShots