Dice TalentSearch (formerly Open Web) is a recruiting solution that works by consolidating data on potential employees from 130 different sites.
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
Dice TalentSearch
Hire by Google (discontinued)
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Dice TalentSearch
Hire by Google (discontinued)
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Dice TalentSearch
Hire by Google (discontinued)
Considered Both Products
Dice TalentSearch
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Dice TalentSearch
Like already said Monster or Career Builder doesnt have the filter option to filter the candidate current location which Dice TalentSearch has in it. Overall experience is much satisfied to used to eradicate the duplicate profiles. the first thing say about the Dice …
Dice TalentSearch is now a brand and has its market presence when it comes to US market. With right filters and pool it is most preferred job and talent search tool which an organisation aims for.
I received multiple candidates only after hours of posting my jobs on other sites. And for a fraction of the cost! I not only received quality candidates but also candidates who actually matched my requirements. These sites also have the option for proactive outreach and …
Overall, I think we selected and have stayed with DICE because it has a strong concentration of IT specific resources. They also seem to have a good number of candidates who are looking for independent consulting work which best aligns with our current business model. But I …
They all have different features, methodologies/techniques and value. I feel overall Dice Open Web is the most Flexible, Creative Search Tool; yet have already used JobDiva for several years and seems to be a very good ATS. I've been recruiting, sourcing and managing talent …
what works well for Dice Open Web is that it can be used internally within a company very well. the groups of jobs with same skill sets across teams can be well displayed on the web and thus candidates can apply to multiple jobs in one go. ability to customize email templates, …
The decision to go with Dice wasn't up to me, it was up to technology leaders and decision makers above me. The decision to go with it originally was the belief that it was more robust than it really was and was a true competitor to the likes of Linkedin. It seems a bit …
We are also using Hiring Monster/Tech Fetch/Career Builder, apart from Dice. However, the search results of Dice are best. We have closed many candidates through Dice including many niche skills that are rarely available in the market or on other job boards. I highly recommend …
This is a great tool where it consolidates the search results from over 50+ social and professional networking sites and brings you a large pool of candidates. This includes a combination of both active as well as a passive pool of resources. Helped a lot with a few of the …
I would rate Dice Open Web in the middle of the stack of tools we use. Not great, but worth using at times. Entelo and SeekOut are probably better from a search capability, although SeekOut is still a bit new.
Dice Open Web Social Media connect using Big Data technology makes it worth while using the application. Dice in itself has a huge database of candidates with updated resume which is good enough for us to find the right candidates matching our profile. With Dice the Candidates …
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. …
This platform is probably more suited for small to mid-size companies that may not have super specific roles and requirements. Organizations also that may not have a large budget for these types of programs also could be a good fit as it does offer some value, but probably falls behind in the cutting edge and super competitive landscape for platforms or organizations. It's probably less appropriate for large companies or places that are investing in current and cutting edge technology or products.
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.
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.
I'm assuming we will keep using DICE, but Indeed and LinkedIn are starting to prove their value and strength in having candidates/consultants use their services to look for new opportunities.
Its already I mentioned it is used to search the resumes of relevant profile upon the request of clients requirement. comfortable with filters to validate the profile before the resumes open. Can be able to locate the profile which the recruiter is willing to work on the requirement. Little more costly when compared to other job portals.
Dice provides ease of sourcing candidates and is the most useful in staffing industry. However, we still recommend the team to provide older version access to the user which was much easier and flexible to use. Dice posting is the best feature in Dice. The Boolean Search feature in Dice is also very useful.
what works well for Dice Open Web is that it can be used internally within a company very well. the groups of jobs with same skill sets across teams can be well displayed on the web and thus candidates can apply to multiple jobs in one go. ability to customize email templates, set alerts and notifications are really 3-5 steps processes. Candidates can also track their own progress once their process starts for filling an opening in a group.
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.
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.
