We performed a comparison between Cegid and PeopleSoft based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Talent Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features of Meta4 are payroll and resource recruitment. However, all of the features in the human resource system are useful."
"The most valuable feature is you can customize every type of payroll calculation that you have."
"The tool provides a lot of options."
"The support team were friendly and work in a systematic way. When contacting support you are able to add a level of priority to your case which is always respected by their team."
"The solution has a great payroll engine."
"Performance appraisal might be the most valuable feature for us."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the payment engine."
"The performance appraisal is the most valuable feature."
"I would recommend the solution. It's very stable and scalable, which makes it a reliable solution."
"PeopleSoft is scalable."
"I often say that PeopleSoft's greatest feature is how customizable it is."
"Very stable in terms of performance and scalability."
"The breadcrumb approach to navigation in PeopleSoft is good. nVision is also a good supplement."
"PeopleSoft is mostly used for payroll and core HR functionality. Some customers use it for its finance module."
"The time system is what we get the most benefit from."
"The integration between Human Capital Management (HCM) and PeopleSoft is an important feature."
"The HR portal, training model, and the development career model all need improvement."
"I would like to have recruitment and acquisition features added to this solution."
"In future releases, it would be useful to see reporting lines of all the team members in our business to understand who reports to whom."
"The user interface could be improved and the maintenance is complex when it comes to upgrades."
"The solution is a little bit slow."
"The HR portal, training model, and development career model could all use improvement. Stability and scalability should be improved as well."
"training and performance could be improved."
"Meta4 could improve by allowing users to manage things by themself."
"One aspect where PeopleSoft could see improvement is in its level of customization."
"The API integration could be better."
"The biggest disadvantage with things like PeopleSoft is that they do continuous support and fixes and upgrades. You get to choose when you want to implement that upgrade. However, in order to keep up, you have to upgrade."
"On the other hand, the more recent push for standardization precludes customized approaches to certain industry requirements."
"I would like to see a better UI."
"I'd like PeopleSoft to be like on the cloud and more mobile-friendly. If I try to access it from a cell phone, it's a bit difficult, so it would be great if PeopleSoft could improve these features."
"Areas that need improvement are the add-ons to the fluid pages and additional features in SCM and finance, both functionally and technically."
"If there is another release, they should look at going to mobile computing to stay competitive."
Cegid is ranked 23rd in Talent Management with 12 reviews while PeopleSoft is ranked 5th in Talent Management with 80 reviews. Cegid is rated 7.2, while PeopleSoft is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cegid writes "Facilitates reusability, loads massive data, and creates reports". On the other hand, the top reviewer of PeopleSoft writes "Comprehensive solution for SCM but requires add-ons for fluid pages". Cegid is most compared with SAP SuccessFactors, SAP HCM, Workday, UKG and BambooHR, whereas PeopleSoft is most compared with Oracle HCM Cloud, Workday, Oracle Fusion Cloud ERP, SAP SuccessFactors and SAP ERP. See our Cegid vs. PeopleSoft report.
See our list of best Talent Management vendors.
We monitor all Talent Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.