PageUp vs. PeopleAdmin Higher Ed Platform, from Powerschool

It's well suited for HR purposes and I think it's also very strong for recruitment reasons. However, it can be very confusing if you're not trained in it. I don't think it's appropriate for anything other than HR. For example, it would not be conducive for accounting, but it is conducive when a department needs to quickly find an employee.

Incentivized

PeopleAdmin handles the process of recruiting very well. It integrated into the jobbing.com web pages as well as other job websites. The learning curve for users is not too steep. The web page format is intuitive to users. The user interface looks good. The initial issue would be the number of candidates the organization handles per year. Due to our business, we handle a large number of candidates, but US and international. PeopleAdmin facilitates this process.

• 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

• Moving applicants through workflow is not a very fluid process. When the number of applicants spans multiple pages one is forced to work with each page individually; moving applicants to a status that requires approval precludes moving any others in workflow without filtering them out but it is not obvious that one needs to be aware of this.
• One can't search for a job description by simply typing in the employee's name - it requires using the position number and often the name is what is at hand.
• When one changes positions within the organization and requires different access there does not seem to be a way to be added globally to job descriptions in the new unit - the process is far too manual. Although I believe adding new units to ones profile is fairly simple, apparently one can't remove the old units so I continue to see things that I no longer need to.

Incentivized

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.

We understood that PageUp was more complete and could offer us more possibilities than other tools. It was more flexible considering the workflow process and had a complete suite of reports, analytics, and dashboard. The other side of it was the deployment time, [which] probably took longer than other similar tools, so it is very important to consider your needs and deadlines.

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.