Lumesse TalentLink (legacy) vs. PeopleFluent

Lumesse is well suited for global companies, that are not too large and may get enough attention/support from other larger vendors.

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

• It has open text boxes to add notes, on the individual candidate home page. Which is helpful when making a quick look at an individual, these notes are very obvious.
• It has a search function; however it lacks a wild card (*); so if a req or candidate are spelled differently or referred to differently, there is no way to find them
• Its a simple, no frills lay out

• 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.

• I have found the system to be very inconsistent and "buggy", for lack of a better term. Today I searched for an internal requisition number and the system could not find the data. I found it by scrolling through manually, and verified that I had entered the information precisely as it appeared. There seems to be no explanation as to why it could not locate this particular entry, but I have been able to use the function without a problem in other instances.
• The navigation is not intuitive or user-friendly. It takes an exorbitant amount of clicks to accomplish a task. Each action is confusing and time-consuming.
• The system requires a large amount of redundant information in order to enter a job and does not auto-populate. If I indicate a position is located in Chicago, it would logically follow that the state is "Illinois", the country is "United States", and the currency is "USD". I have to manually input these details in both the requisition as well as the separate job advertisement page.
• Changes to the job requisition are not reflected in the job advertisement, as they are separate entities. If you need to make a change, you have to update the details twice.

• 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

This seems to work for us because of all the things we can do with the system (i.e. create all kinds of reports).

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.

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

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

Lumesse is an average to abover average ATS in my opinion. We work with Lumesse because they came to us with our new client. I don't have an overall issue with Lumesse like I do with some other ATS's.

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

• Decreased employee efficiency -- There are so many steps to create an entry that our recruiters use the system as little as possible. We had hoped to use Lumesse for centralizing information and reporting, but have not been able to do so. Instead, each recruiter keeps a separate Excel sheet, defeating the purpose of having an ATS in the first place. We only use Lumesse to post to our website now. We are very disappointed.

• 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