PeopleSoft Reviews

Flexibility in configuration.

I have used this product at two state universities and at a private, for-profit company. It continues to amaze me at how everyone administers something like benefits and how differently the system is modified to conform to the ‘company’s’ way of doing business instead of ‘rethinking’ procedures and using delivered functionality.

Oracle is always working with its customers by using focus groups to improve the product. I think this works well.

I started using PeopleSoft in an IT support role with Peoplesoft 7.5 when the product was client-based before moving to 8.9 on the Internet about 18 years ago.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

The technical support is good.

Not applicable.

Initial setup can be complex without training or use of consultants. However, once you have invested in training, the setup can be straightforward with the use of consultants. I definitely think you need to have a company ‘expert’ in every module who knows the policy and procedures and is able to ‘think’ in both a functional and technical mode to work with consultants.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Research all possible options and ask plenty of questions as well as visiting one or two sites where the product has been installed and talk to users. Become part of the networking group.

• Agile system configurations to accommodate business dynamics

The synchronization of business processes, and the software, streamlined the shared service departments to run 40% leaner.

The last conference I went to presented product enhancements that alleviated some of the end-to-end processing gaps we worked around with all the applications noted below, especially in the area of reporting.

We've used it for 20-plus years.

Yes, there have been issues. You must have an Agile DBA team to tune for dynamic data volume.

No.

We rarely reached out to PeopleSoft.

Yes, we were part of the Y2K challenge.

We pledged to keep the setup “vanilla”. In what ways? Defining the Master data for each application is critical to successfully configuring the systems to operate seamlessly daily, and to manage business dynamics like M&A, international operations. Reporting was our biggest challenge that was not "delivered" by PeopleSoft.

Negotiate, and don’t buy into the cloud option.

SAP, Oracle, and JD Edwards.

We use General Ledger, Billing, Accounts Receivable, Projects, Asset Management, Payroll, Accounts Payable. All would be rated an eight out of 10 as we developed solutions to fill "product gaps" that were part of later application releases.

We had an army of consultants from different organizations who collaborated and delivered the most vital aspect of scalability — a solid foundation to build upon. We also dedicated subject matter experts for each application and a team that ensured the "big picture" (e.g. consolidated reporting, operational and audit checks and balances, etc.) to work with the consultants.

We use PeopleSoft to:

• Manage HR globally
• Take care of payroll for all US employees (both salary and hourly at all plants in different states and localities).
• Administer benefits and compensation and integrating with all outside benefit vendors and state/federal tax agencies.

Most probably, an organization cannot meet obligations without PeopleSoft (or similar applications). What I can say is, with limited resources, it makes it operational, without outsourcing to expensive third-party service providers. And since it has strong application tools, it helps to integrate with both internal and external applications, as well as secure self-service and manager self-service applications.

• It has great depth of application functionality and flexibility of developing and integrating with others.
• In recent years, they added more functionality in the mobile, analytical reporting, and installing/patching/hosting area.

• I would like to see applications functionality as the base rather than differently priced modules.
• The quality of service has gone down after Oracle took over and this can be restored, and scope for online search could be improved.
• Tools could be simplified and added for more auto typing and improving the current Java support.

Even when we moved to Windows and SQL server platform to save money, the performance was acceptable. We are totally on virtual servers including databases. But if the company needs higher performance, they can go with bigger servers and other platforms.

Highly scalable, and initially (18 years back), we were processing payroll for more than 10,000 employees.

It was excellent before when it was PeopleSoft, and it is still OK now.

Long back (20 years ago), we used ADP solution for payroll and some hosted solution (Saba) for some functionalities like performance management.

Initially, it was complex, expensive, and it was done with the help of an external consulting company since the expertise was not there and it was a decentralized organization. They also had to implement payroll in 20 plants or so at the same time with a custom T&A application and hundreds of requirement gathering sessions and hundreds of training sessions. If we had to do the same thing, it would be a lot different; we know what is required and how it needs to be done.

The vendor was good, but if you do not know exactly what you need and what the product can do, it would be expensive. So you need to do the internal analysis and gathering first and then go with the vendor.

We implemented early, and we are reaping benefits now and rolling out new functionality and self-service apps without any additional budgets (that is with two internal resources, same resources for maintaining the application and changes required with benefit vendors). 

If the organization has complex needs that require constant changes based on business changes and has a solid IT department, there might not be a better solution than PeopleSoft. 

If the organization wants to quickly get up to speed and more money, they can look into the other hosted solution and assume not too many changes after you implement.

Setup costs may be the biggest cost component, and you need to assemble with experienced people with the product or right consulting company to reduce the costs and time duration. Might be a good idea to go in phases — first with HR and keep working in parallel with other modules rather than big-bang with all modules when the organization does not understand the product that well.

At that time, none of these solutions were there in the market (SAP, SAP SuccessFactors, Workday, etc.).

Spend more time in deciding the architecture and hosting environment based on the experience (virtualization, database, clustering, load balancing, server platform) on the technology side. To provide quicker benefits to the whole population, build a 2FA solution from the beginning and provide all self-service functionality right from the beginning (that can include all benefits and related documentation online) — that way management would see clear benefits.

We're a consulting company, therefore, we get involved in all kinds of use cases.

PeopleSoft is used for usually larger organizations and some middle tier. However, usually, organizations that are maybe 2000 employees or two and a half billion dollars or more tend to be users. They use it primarily for back-office systems, finance supply chain, human resources, payroll benefits, that kind of stuff. That includes recruiting and everything associated with HCM. It's one of the primary ERP systems.

The most valuable feature is that it's wide and broad and it does about everything anybody needs in a major organization from a back-office systems point of view. 

It's a mature product. I've been using it since 1994. It came out maybe a few years before that. It's matured over the years to where, from a back-office system point of view in those primary areas, if you want an all-inclusive system, you can do almost anything you need to do with PeopleSoft without having to buy other third party systems to bolt on to it.

They continue to improve and support the product. The latest announcement was that they're going to continue to support it through 2032. However, every year they add a year or two to that. They confirm their outgoing support for 10 years almost every year.

It's a real contrast between things like Workday and Oracle cloud. The biggest challenge we see as consultants from an Oracle cloud and Workday point of view is that you cannot customize those systems to better fit your business processes. Companies that are smaller and that are less complex tend to go with Oracle and Workday. The big advantage there is they don't have to do any upgrades. However, they're almost forced into the changes if there are new versions for these cloud systems. The good news is you don't have to upgrade them. The bad news is it may not support all your business processes as you want. Therefore, you have to change your business processes to fit the software.

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. The biggest challenge with PeopleSoft is it's a trade-off between feature functionality and the pain of going through those upgrades. And when you upgrade, you've got to do some work. You have to look at what's available in the new version, figure out whether we're going to use that or not, and turn it on or not. On top of that, it's got to go through an implementation process.

Most people do about one upgrade per year. Some people do two, and some people get way behind. However, in order to take advantage of what they buy and pay for, they need to really do probably at least one upgrade a year. And it's a minor upgrade. It's not the kind of upgrade we used to think of that people did once every five years that was almost a reimplementation. In upgrade terms, it's a minor upgrade, however, it is an upgrade.

The difference in PeopleSoft and cloud version is the trade-off between not being able to do any customization and being forced into upgrades almost monthly. You don't have a chance to take your time. You don't have a choice when you do it. It just happens.

Within the company, we've been dealing with PeopleSoft for 15 years. I personally have been dealing with PeopleSoft going back to 1994. I have many, many years of experience working with it.

I would say their tech support is good. I don't have a problem there. They've been doing this a long time, so they know how to do it.

I've also used SAP - and have about five years of experience with it.

The software comes with a fee, with a license fee. The upgrade software comes with a license fee. However, it takes their staff time and resources to go through that. Sometimes customers will hire a consultant firm like us to help them get through it. That would be an extra cost, technically speaking.

The cost varies by license and license type. Many times, it's so much per user, and depending on which software modules you're using. It depends on the modules you're using and how many users you have using that module.

Some people buy what may be called an enterprise-wide license, where it's not really based on the number of users. You get more of a flat cost for that and the users may not be impacted. I haven't gotten involved in that in a while, therefore, I'm not sure how it works.

We're a PeopleSoft partner. We're primarily an Oracle and are a PeopleSoft consultancy where we implement and help people use the PeopleSoft systems. Now we're combining that with UiPath, and so most of the things we do are going to be PeopleSoft system related.

Having been in this business for 25 years or so, my biggest advice for PeopleSoft clients would be the same for any software client - that whenever they implement it, that they do it right and not try to do it cheaply.

Once they do it right, they will realize the benefit from doing it right forever, from then on. If they do it on the cheap to take shortcuts, they will pay the price for taking those shortcuts until they get around to making the investment to fix it. Customers are often a victim of themselves by trying to do it too cheap.

For example, I had one large enterprise client that asked their consulting firm how long it was going to take to put in PeopleSoft. They were putting in about everything PeopleSoft offers. It was a major implementation for the financial supply chain, human resources, payroll benefits, all that stuff. They had something like 130,000 people. It was a big, big corporation.

The consultant company came back and said, "Probably two years, maybe as soon as 18 months, but probably two years to get it implemented and into production from the time we actually start." The company came back and gave them six months, and the implementation was a disaster. The company tried to blame it on the consulting firm. However, they said, "Hey, man, you gave us six months and we should have taken two years for an organization of your size and complexity."

That's a little more than typical. Lots of times people will, instead of 18 months, take 12 months or 15 months. The more they try to shortcut the implementation, the more problems they create for themselves.

The biggest advantage - whether they're doing PeopleSoft, SAP - et cetera - for software companies and the clients, if they're going to put in a major software system, don't try to do it the cheapest you can. Do it the best you can. If you do that, it will pay off in spades. If you don't, it will screw you. That's the biggest advice I would have.

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten.

I basically deal with order management, purchasing order, inventory and accounts receivable.

In general, this solution is user-friendly and also performs well. There are two types of forms. One is a standardized form, which you can define things into. The other, you can customize so more repetition can be done in an even manner. That way, it can be designed for what the public or user actually wants. It's not very tough for any person, or layman to understand exactly what the screen requires one to do.

I believe this software is quite easy to work with, because I have used other software, such as SAP. I find Oracle and SAP are both easier to work with than other apps.

The other reason I use this solution is because I have only worked for one and a half years with SAP, whereas I have been working with Oracle for nine years, so I have more experience in Oracle and I find it more user-friendly.

I think the inventory part it should be simplified. There is the GR, or Good Receipt note, which is the time that the materials come in, and the workdays, etc. There is a lot of shuffling through pages, which creates a lot of problems for our users. They don't know which page to go to, where to create a GR, or where to create a stock entry. In other words, all the information is very daunting. It's very easy for people to understand and get better clarity over it.

I would like to see order management or purchase order screens, with all of the information there on a single line, so you just have to scroll the page to the right side to view all of the information. If you work in inventory, however, you have to keep on changing the screen, one after another. I think that is not perfect, so improvement can be done here.

In terms of additional features, I would like to see a list of employees entered into the organization, their attendance, payroll, and other things that are more linked to Oracle. Only the name of the employee which is entered into the Oracle Master is there, but the in and out system of an employee and other things like payroll, salary, etc., are not included in Oracle. For those things, we have to use another software or ERP.

For human resources, we have one ERP and for daily transactions, we have another ERP. I think Oracle can take this part of the detailed system and attendance into Oracle so that it is right there in one ERP. Oracle could handle all of the transactions, whether they are in human resources, accounting, supply chain, or any other department.

I've been working with Oracle PeopleSoft for more than nine years.

Sometimes when a month is closing, there is a huge number of invoices that are being generated and many orders being placed by customers. At that time, there is a huge invoice created and the server cannot handle the capacity. Then the invoice gets stuck up in between. The time-lapse is due to this and due to the fact that the order cannot be generated during this time, may mean that two percent of your opportunity is lost. 

Apart from that, stability is good. If you take a calendar month of 30 days, from the 4th to the 25th, all is well and good. After getting to the 30th, which is the peak time of sale, I think the software hangs up too much.

There is too much demand from customers at that time, so you have to handle it very well so that none of the other invoices are getting stuck. You also need to make sure pickup and delivery are on the spot and on time.

This solution can be expanded at any time. Initially, we started in one department and then another department got used to it. Later on, other departments began to use it. In our entire company, we have 27 branch offices and four factories. Initially, it was only implemented in the head office to get people used to it. Now, the entire company has been using it, including branches and our department center, all of the 10,000 employees have been using it. It's scalable. Everybody is used to it now.

It's used by 10,000 people. We have 10,000 employees here.

I've always been in touch with technical support because I love to actually see the coding they do behind the bug releases. I don't understand that much, but my curiosity makes me just want to know what they write there and how they put the command in it to clear the invoices, etc. When I see at the end of the month that it gets stuck, they clear the errors from the back end. There are also many times when there is a load on the servers, so they jointly come up to the other end and they write some of the other code.

I really don't understand the technical part, but I enjoy seeing it and I think that they do a great job. There is a functional coordinator and there are technician coordinators, though we as the users are not supposed to interfere with the technical people. Functionality has to coordinate with technical, but there are some people who can directly talk to the technical guys. For instance, when you are stuck, there is a problem with the server, or the invoices are getting stuck, I am one of the people that can go and ask them.

In terms of technical support, I can approach them directly and ask them for assistance. Instead of going through the functional team, I ask them directly. It's a direct communication, so it goes faster.

The initial setup is straightforward. It is not complex.

Initially, we needed help to implement this solution because I was an SAP user, so getting into Oracle, I needed consultants to understand it. Obviously, if you're moving from one ERP to another ERP, you need to get help from somebody to get educated. There was a data consultancy which was reappointed here to train each and every one of them.

We were trained at first until they trained the trainer. You get your first training and then you can train other people.

Based on my experience, if your company is expanding on a very high level and already has good growth in it, you could do very well with Oracle. If you want to develop your own project as well, which involves standardized as well as customized forms, that would be another reason to go with Oracle.

SAP has their own advantages as well, so I would not say that Oracle is the best platform. You could go with SAP also. It depends which company asks for which ERP software.

I would rate this solution as seven out of ten.

This solution is similar to SAP SuccessFactors, and Workday. 

PeopleSoft HRMS is an ERP software which was one of the leading successful software in North America, in the Canadian Region.

We have implemented multiple modules that are the core HR function management, performance management, training, administrative training, access management, global payroll for India, and recruitment.

The most valuable feature is the core HR, the strength, how the data is captured, and position management that gives flexibility in different organizations.

Also, the work center where you can see the different steps in your activity guide. There are different tasks that need to be performed for a recruiter to set up an activity guide. He can see all of the tasks to complete the upgrading for a new hire.

The ease of use. PeopleSoft is easy to understand, where any end user that is logged in can easily navigate through the menus. You don't need any help as long as you have the instructions. 

The reporting needs to be improved. 

It would be helpful for the end-user if the reports were customized. They would be able to select the fields while generating their reports.

In the next release, they can look at reducing the price.

This solution is stable.

This solution is scalable.

We have eight thousand users with different companies.

The technical support is very good.

The initial setup is straightforward. It is not complex.

Deployment depends on the size of the organization. If you are just installing it, it can take a week, but if you are installing, and doing a quality implementation it can take five to six months, which would include doing analysis, customization, and testing.

I don't know if they are still providing licenses or if they have suspended licenses.

There have been a lot of upgrades in the 9.2 version with the UI and implementation of data analytics, HR analytics, the analytics dashboards have been introduced, the mobility, and the ability to use PeopleSoft applications on a mobile device.

The features are good but you will have to do cost-data analysis with other modules and if it fits you can go for it. It is a good product to go with.

You get all of the features, and anything that you don't get, you can customize.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We love the General Ledger feature. It does what we need it to do -- financial reports of accounts payable, T&O, and T&E. I'm not called at 2 am to put out a fire anymore. And for me, the stability is extremely important. It's important that it's reliable, up, and available for clients when they need.

So many organizations are using it that we didn't have to develop something in-house. PeopleSoft has been around for a long time, and we bought it because it's a credible product. We didn't have to spend the money to build something ourselves that has all the functionalities that it already has. It does everything we need it to do.

We've had to build all our data warehouses and datamarts in order for PeopleSoft to do the detailed reporting that we need. I really wish we didn't have to do that. I think that if PeopleSoft had more detailed reporting we wouldn't have to do all this work. That's the real pain point for me, especially since we have to provide support for all of it. It's not a part of PeopleSoft, so we've had to create a whole other piece that connected.

We've had it for fifteen or twenty years. The clients love it. It's very easy to use.

We've had no issues with deploying it.

It've very stable and we've had no issues with instability.

Scalable is good now, and the team knows how to support it as we grow.

We had a large vendor team help us with the initial setup, and then I helped my team with the transition, making sure we were trained and ready to support it. But I didn't physically move code or anything like that myself.

We actually started the project for initial setup about five times because the clients wanted everything. We asked for specific functionalities because it really can do anything, but you can't just have the entire world. So the vendor came in with a solution, and we went with it. But the vendor team was huge and costly, which we can't have going forward.

We're hoping now as we're upgrading to the next version that we'll have our own in-house resources to do the work ourselves. But the PeopleSoft setup was so big with so many other pieces we needed for reporting that it took a long time to design with many parts that were extras in the downstream part of the system.

In fact, the integration with all the interfaces in our system was probably the hardest thing. We have over 80 different systems that feed our PeopleSoft application with around seven different formats of the general ledger. So from changing the old, very cryptic systems to the new layout has been a challenge. We've bit the bullet on doing that, though, and it's a lot to maintain.

We used a mixed implementation team of people from IBM, Infosys, and our in-house team.

It's good and we're pretty satisfied with it. Make sure you go with the latest version of PeopleSoft, but also make sure you plan and have the right people and resources trained to know the system. If you're new, get a demo and have a plan.

We use the product in our everyday HR functions. I use it to verify salaries or employment dates, examine transactions submitted by my team, check recruitment postings, and ensure the implementation of performance reviews.

I use the reporting feature occasionally to check for potential improvements in timesheets. We have integrated it with Power BI. 

The product is not intuitive, and finding the right candidate can be arduous. 

I have been using the product for four and a half years. 

I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten. 

I rate PeopleSoft's scalability a seven out of ten. My institution has several thousand users here. I don't have the exact number of those with the same access as me, but in our unit alone, there are probably around 20 people connected to HR with similar access. University-wide, though, we're looking at several thousand users utilizing the software.

We have our technical team to resolve the issues. 

The major difference I've noticed between PeopleSoft and other systems I've used lies in its intuitiveness and user-friendliness. Over my four and a half years of using PeopleSoft, I've become more accustomed to navigating it, but for new users, it can still pose a challenge compared to other systems.

I rate the overall product a seven out of ten.