Built for Teams is an HRIS solution that is designed for small and mid-sized businesses. The vendor’s value proposition is that their employee self-service capabilities help to offload work from valuable HR managers while giving employees direct access to important information. Additionally, the vendor says customers select their solution due to the intuitive user interface and their excellent customer service.
N/A
Hire by Google (discontinued)
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
Hire, by Google, was a recruiting app for G suite customers. The product includes functionality for applicant tracking, candidate relationship management, and candidate sourcing. Google sunsetted the product in late 2020.
N/A
Pricing
Built for Teams
Hire by Google (discontinued)
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Built for Teams
Hire by Google (discontinued)
Free Trial
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Built for Teams
Hire by Google (discontinued)
Considered Both Products
Built for Teams
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Built for Teams
Slightly different focuses and I still use both. Microsoft Visio is great for creating all kinds of diagrams. Whereas Built for Tens is more about people management, so you can set up who is where and track their relationships through the other individuals in the organization. …
not sure this isn't part of my role we used to use Insperity premiere for booking vacation since that’s our hr/payroll system but apparently built is better for this. I’m not sure why we switched but it is fairly easy to use and customize. Insperity was harder to access.
Built for Teams is super easy to use and program (unlike our old SharePoint intranet). It is extremely cost-effective as compared with Sharepoint. Our employees love the info that is instantly at their fingertips. They also love having the app on their phones to request time …
We use the program for different purposes. JustWorks is good because it provides more services like payment tracking and information on insurance, compared to built for teams. But Built for Teams still has good use from an employee information perspective. That's why my company …
I picked Google Hire after spending about 3 months on Bullhorn. I found Bullhorn to be terrible. It's WAY more customizable and theoretically powerful, but it's also a pain to set up and maintain. Even just getting your job page set up on your own site required tech support. …
If you are managing PTO for numerous employees, this program is the best. It is easy to read, easy to use and easy to maintain. The app is especially nice for our employees to check balances and to put in requests for time off from the road. There are probably more robust software solutions for extremely large organizations, but I really think the Built for Teams is one of the best out there.
Google Hire is very good at doing the basics well. I believe for most internal HR departments at small companies, this is all you need. It also works well for small to medium-sized staffing companies that just want something reliable and easy to use. What Google Hire doesn't do very well is be flexible. They don't have custom options, they don't have a ton of settings, and their development cycle is slow. As a result, it's pretty much what you see is what you get.
Google does search well so when I search through our database for candidates, I'm confident that I'm pulling up all the right people from what we have.
They have a modern and nice user interface - this is one of the biggest reasons to use it over other systems, as most ATS' are pretty ancient looking and not very pleasant to use.
Their support is very good at answering and addressing questions.
Their pricing is incredible. I'm sure at some point it will change, but for small companies paying 100+ per user for other ATS' - it's incredible to pay 100/month for the whole company.
Our biggest problem has been integration with other packages. We still have to create or delete users in other systems. It would be nice to have automated integrations with those systems.
Despite many many months of requests, Google still hasn't implemented ANY custom fields. This makes it tough for an external recruiting firm to track what they want (most importantly: desired salary).
The job board integration is not great for external recruiters, mostly at the fault of Indeed. Indeed flagged us as a recruiting firm and so none of our jobs actually go live. While I know this is an Indeed problem (we had the same problem when using Bullhorn), Breezy ATS never has that problem for us so I don't know what they're doing differently.
Their development cycles are quite frankly very slow. I've requested some features, and while support is great about telling me it's coming or in the pipeline, I honestly don't really see a difference in the product since we started using it. It's still great to use, and we still love the software, but there haven't been too many visible improvements that make any difference to our work.
Being Google, it can sometimes be frustrating that one arm doesn't talk to the other. For example, they announced a Gmail for Works App/Extension integration, but for some reason when they launched it, admins of a domain couldn't install it. Google Hire pointed to the Google for Works team, and it took literally months to fix. Not the end of the world, but just very silly considering they're the same company.
We use the program for different purposes. Justworks is good because it provides more services like payment tracking and information on insurance, compared to built for teams. But Built for Teams still has good use from an employee information perspective. That's why my company still uses both services though we could probably just use Justworks.
I picked Google Hire after spending about 3 months on Bullhorn. I found Bullhorn to be terrible. It's WAY more customizable and theoretically powerful, but it's also a pain to set up and maintain. Even just getting your job page set up on your own site required tech support. Getting it eventually to what you want could be a great benefit, but Google Hire does great right out of the box and is a lot cheaper. Breezy HR is a great system. It's a bit more expensive than Google Hire for multiple job postings, but their system is equally easy to use and straight forward. However, we are all in on Google Products, so it was just a no brainer to go with Hire for a better price and most likely a better search function.
100% employee satisfaction with the request. It's very easy to manage any request and approve.
Easy to monitor available time-off and PTO's. We cut down 80% of paperwork and wastage of labor hours in calculating what an individual has accrued for their vacation and PTO.
The best part is transparency between supervisor and team member on requests for late arrivals, early departures, or missing work by recording it in Built for Teams.
Google Hire makes, unfortunately, a very little impact on our ROI, but I think in the ATS world that's a good thing. It simply acts as a record that we can put everything in and easily reference, and the fact that it works overall makes it a positive software product in the long run.
While the search works great, I don't know that I've ever specifically found a candidate and placed them due to it. That could be a result of our job reqs though.
The biggest most obvious impact is really just the price. We needed a tool that does what Google Hire does, reliably. Most other companies charge at least 150 or so for 2 people, whereas Google Hire is 100/month for many users. It gives us flexibility for the future and helps minimize what could be a big expense. That definitely helps our bottom line.
