We performed a comparison between SAP SuccessFactors and Work.com based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about SAP, Workday, Oracle and others in Cloud HCM."This solution has always been stable for me."
"The performance of the solution is very good."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The tool is easy to use for performance management. We haven't experienced any issues with SAP SuccessFactors for performance management, which is great. However, since we're still learning to use it fully, we might not utilize all its available features yet."
"We use the cloud version to maintain all the employee records, payroll, etc. We use everything that comes with the HR suite."
"I think it's perfect that every requirement has flexibility in how it is handled, and that there are several workarounds for any problem we are looking to solve. Each problem has multiple solutions, so it gives us a lot of flexibility in terms of processes."
"It's brought to our organization a big big improvement. We would give it a good rating."
"There are a lot of features in SuccessFactors that HR can actually explore. We recently implemented a learning platform that employs the individual staff to actually manage their own learning."
"We have found value in Work.com because it gave us a central place for capturing any opportunities-related information, such as client-related information. Additionally, it is a place for storing this information. Anyone in the organization, if it was being updated actively by the people or by the sales team, could have access to it. Once the contact information is there about any client, then it stays there. If you are approaching a client, you are able to check if there's any history. It's a good tool, but it all depends on how disciplined the sales team is in entering the information regularly."
"There are a few features that are missing. There are specific features on the HTM, such as telecom safety, that just isn't there. It's not a very detailed solution in that sense. However, it is maybe not expected to have those kinds of features on the surface level of the product."
"We have many interruptions and disconnection points into processes, which is why we are looking to another solution. We are not so happy with the system. We believe we have in the market better solution, so we are looking for alternatives but so far the system has been used a lot."
"They should be more user friendly and give us more tools to make it more flexible."
"The Onboarding module must be improved."
"The SAP SuccessFactors updates need to be more industry-specific because every industry has specific modules. What I want to be added to SAP SuccessFactors is a chat box where SAP staff can give support to users."
"The price of the solution could improve, it is too high."
"It is not that user-friendly. It can be made more user-friendly."
"The process for long modules needs to be improved, because compared to how it's done with a competitor (Meta4), the competitor's process was simpler."
"I found Work.com a bit clunky. There were too many fields, but maybe that was the design. It could be company-specific to me. There were overlapping fields and sometimes it was confusing."
Earn 20 points
SAP SuccessFactors is ranked 1st in Cloud HCM with 90 reviews while Work.com is ranked 18th in Sales Performance Management. SAP SuccessFactors is rated 7.8, while Work.com is rated 6.4. The top reviewer of SAP SuccessFactors writes "Offers many useful modules and integrations, and helps companies adhere to best practices". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Work.com writes "Centralized management, useful information storage, but can feel clunky". SAP SuccessFactors is most compared with SAP HCM, Workday, Oracle HCM Cloud, PeopleSoft and UKG, whereas Work.com is most compared with Workday.
We monitor all Cloud HCM 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.