PageUp vs. PeopleAdmin Higher Ed Platform, from Powerschool

I think it can be very helpful and generate great ROI if you are a big company with a lot of recruitment processes running. It provides a centralized management view and a lot of resources/features. It can be too much and become hard to manage if you have spot and urgent demands, since it takes time to start getting results from the system, considering its learning curve.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

• It has the ability to be easy to use and has multiple components that make it easy to quickly find employees.
• I really enjoy using PageUp because once you're trained in it, it's very easy to use.
• It's especially strong in being able to organize manage positions and you're able to put as much information as you need on the job descriptions.

Incentivized

• 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.

• At first reporting and analytics were a bit confusing, but then we got used to it.
• It would be great to have tools to make easier the deployment of simple and quick recruitment process, reducing the learning curve to use the product.
• A version in Portuguese would make everything easier for us.

Incentivized

• 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.

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.

I have only used PageUp

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

• Positive: centralized and more efficient management process
• Positive: cost saving when compared to other traditional recruitment processes
• Negative: learning curve and time to deploy, especially if users are not very experienced with recruitment processes

Incentivized

• 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.