Datapeople Reviews & Product Details

I really like how it is so easy to use and it makes my job a lot easier

So far, I have not experienced any negative feedback while using this

This really helps out with LinkedIn and the data that I'm using

We like the scoring Mechanics and suggestions.

Datapeople doesn't talk nicely to our HR system.

Cleaning Up Job Descriptions

Being able to fine-tune the language used

The lack of seamless integration with our ATS

Being more transparent and direct with our expectations

Real-time feedback instead of having to A/B test and guess where to improve. Having suggestions on what language to change is helpful.

Sometimes there are a couple of bugs, but the team are quick to resolve them or work through them with us. The thing I disliked most has been altered already - which was the inability to see your own JD with a recommended one side-by-side.

Ensuring we're doing what we can to reduce unconscious bias. It's also helpful for our candidates and employees to know that we're doing what we can at the point of entry to reduce bias and open the door to all types of candidates.

Provided word recommendations and useful tips

Sometimes it cuts too much description out

Creating a more inclusive candidate pool

Keeping it short and simple. Candidates rarely need a laundry list of responsibilities. I see the JD as a tool for advertising the role to potential candidates rather than as an exhaustive list of roles and responsibilities. In that light, one might be able to boil down the responsibilities to just 3-5 bullets that sell the role a little more and datapeople helps you cut the fluff, use language that speaks to the candidate, strong action verbs, etc.

I would love to distinguish qualifications from knowledge and skills required for the role. An additional section for knowledge and skills would be great. I think title recommendations can be crowd sourced using some algorithm to recommend titles that best match real world applications.

Most JDs I have written on datapeople pull in the a relatively higher number of potential candidates for the role versus traditional JDs. I also get to standardize and harmonize multiple JDs across countries of operation. Our DEI commitments are also adequately reflected in the JDs.

The subsititute words provided and insight into readability by using better wording.

The job length range is pretty unreasonable for high level roles

- readability - DEIB

the real-time feedback in the job description helps us use more inclusive language and remove language that would keep someone from applying. The gamification is extra fun for hiring managers and they get competitive in a fun way to get the best scores.

There are certain words that we cannot change and it doesn't allow for us to highlight them to Datapeople to potentially include in the approved list.

Increasing the quality of applications and improving the communication between hiring managers and recruiters.

It helped me make the JDs short, neat, and straight to the point.

I was unable to capture the reasons why some specific words were not good/recommended to use!

Ensure the JD is written to attract the best talents that fit the role.

Its an actual tool you can use to improve your ability to bring diverse voices into your company. So much of DEI is hit or miss, but Datapeople is always a hit

The tool is still a little wonky - the text blocks are hard to move around and delete.

I have worked a fair amount with executives from traditional companies who write super jargony job listings and its helpful to use Datapeople to show them why this is no longer a great way to go about writing listings