Greenhouse Reviews: 4.4/5 — Solid Choice

Recruiters love the flexibility and ease of use. The application process for candidates is also really seamless and straight forward for candidates.

Lack of system capabilities when it comes to conditional workflows, hierarchacal based security, lack of robust reporting, and no confidential requisitions.

Greenhouse serves as a great solution for our recruiters due to ease of use and benefits our team by providing a streamlined process and great candidate experience.

Sync to gmail, interview reminders and notifications

Reporting features are not easy to mold and limited in what you can report on

Tracking pipelines for different roles and organizing recruiting process -- helps keep hiring for my team organized

It was pretty user friendly and customer support was a fast responsive tool

Not very robust, not very intuitive. Very basic

I am not aware of the issues GH is trying to resolve.

You can manage referrals and get email updates on their status

The UI is not as clean or pretty as it could be

I am just a user since my company requires all referrals go through it

- Notification settings are good + a slack integration - Somewhat customizeable/personalized home dashboards - Easy company referral process - Customer support is good and responsive

- The UI is not good - The reporting and dashboards are just bad and not interactive at all - Too much clicking around to find what you need. - CRM email sequencing is an additional cost. This should be standard with all ATS's - The system relies on integrations to make it robust. - The database filters really need some work. - The Gmail integration is very subpar. Only tracks outbound messages in the activity feed and not all messages like their competitiors.

The system works as it should. It allows us to build and track jobs, candidates and pull basic reporting.

I like that it is an ATS--but I have not used it enough to know what I want about it outside of other ATSs I have used.

I do not like not having someone to speak to on the phone. I don't particularly appreciate that I had live classes that have been canceled. And I don't particularly appreciate the live classes once it hits 30 minutes the instructor ends the class even if you have more questions. And I also wish the knockout questions would make the more qualified candidates stand out more. And the new applicants stand out more and be removed once reviewed as a new applicant. I think there was an ATS system that would give the options of highly recommended, Recommended, and not recommended for candidates that do not meet the knock questions. It would help the resume screening process. Also-- why is there another step of confirmation once an interview is set. After sending out the interview then you have to send out the confirmation email. Why isn't that done once the interview has been sent in the first step? Greenhouse is a decent ATS but it would benefit the customers to be able to have a customer service department that is able to speak to clients on the phone and come in for in house training. There is a lot of little things that would be better to talk to an actual person versus email and live chat.

Helping the candidate and hiring manager experience work together and efficiently. But there is some room for growth with the system.

Greenhouse is very user friendly. The sourcing and recruitment teams were able to log in on day 1 and do their job. Love that. As a member of the IT team, I have found that their resources online are also very thorough. This includes the Development API tools and the FAQ documentation on the main website.

Our company is extremely dynamic and has frequent changes. Unfortunately, Greenhouse is not as customizable/amendable as my particular company needs. For example, after a field is created - the primary key cannot be changed. Similarly, it is frustrating that most of the "good" reporting with more details can only be accessed via APIs. This limits self-service among basic users.

Greenhouse is solving the problem of a sourcing tool, albeit basic. My sourcing and recruitment team was reluctant to use the recruitment tool associated with our current HCM, and Greenhouse seemed to meet their needs.

I enjoy the candidate visualisation dasboard - and there are some really handy reports that help understand candidate quality,passthrough rates etc. The activity field is also really useful to see what last contact was etc.

I think the variables for creating reports are quite confusing and not very intuitive. I wish I was able to action candidates from the visual pipeline page, so that I didn't have to individually click in to each candidate profile. I'd also like the option to filter the pipeline by recruiter. The integration with Linkedin is also poor- and manually adding candidates that we are sourcing is very slow.

It's very comprehensive. It solves candidate tracking, brings all sources to one place, allows for interview scheduling, candidate communication, analysis and reporting.

Greenhouse provides a space for you to organize new hire documents and tasks for company documents.

There is not much I dislike about Greenhouse, I've only used it primarily for work documents and have found it pretty much easy to operate.

Greenhouse provides a place to store documentation and is a great place to reference when needed to see what is required for next steps.

The UI is straightforward to use. You can get a link for a specific job position so that your company can track when someone applies to a job because of you. You can connect Greenhouse to Twitter and LinkedIn.

The chat feature at the bottom of the screen isn't a live chat. It just lets you search based off keywords.

Getting referrals to work at the company. Incentive for referring people.

The ability to track candidates' processes by individual requisition

Greenhouse is a little basic and doesn't fully capture comments and notes and profile updates in the activity log

Greenhouse is our ATS, so it's used to manage all candidates that our TA Team is interviewing and who apply to our openings. It provides an organized database for team collaboration

The ease of navigation. Intuitive. Can open jobs quickly.

Feels like you are not open to our enhancement requests - have several, but seem to get nowhere. Need a quality candidate lifecycle report which shows how long candidates stay in each phase of process. Agencies should get a flag when they submit someone already in ATS.

Intuitive, user-friendly solution for managing applicants.

The usability along with candidate pipeline, interview plan, interview templates and tags support.

Poor Rich Text Format support, customization of question types is really limited, harvest API lacks of scorecards creation or update, which makes the process not feasible to automation, search filter is really limited and sometimes. The completion flow could be more dynamic, let say, further questions may appears only if a certain type of question was selected.

The Candidate Experience as a first-citizen. But also interviewers pool according to business units.

I love how customizable Greenhouse is. Every minute detail of the interview process can be set and templated against. I appreciate the different data-driven functionalities of the tool. For example, knowing which sources produce the most applicants, especially between search firms, is interesting to see. I also like being able to dump candidate data into an excel spreadsheet to manipulate and pull insights from. It's reliable. I've never experienced Greenhouse slow or shut down while I'm working.

Many features of Greenhouse are wasted on a small recruitment program like the one I run at my employer. While I think it's cool that so many details of the interview process and job setup can be dictated, it's a lot of work to have to go through every time I want to post a new job. It would be nice if Greenhouse had more "basic template" options for me to quickly open a job and then go through later on and make changes as necessary. I wish there were more pre-built visualizations in the data & reporting section. While Greenhouse collects a TON of data, it's hard to do anything useful with it unless you are a trained data analyst; because you have to develop all your visualizations to interpret anything outside of the offer details report. The Prospect profile is severely lacking; I would like to be able to save notes, track communications, add multiple departments, and add to closed jobs or projects outside of skill-agnostic "pools". Candidate data is very subject to the job they are interviewing for. If I choose to interview one candidate for multiple openings - data is only saved for the interview process they are ushered through. For example: if I interview a candidate for the CX team, I may have them interview for both IC and Manager opportunities. I typically choose the Manager process in Greenhouse since it requires an extra step. Then, if a candidate is deemed unqualified for the manager position and offered an IC position, the data (time to hire, conversion rates, feedback scores, etc) are all wrong and need to be manually edited.

Greenhouse can identify which search firms produce the best candidates. That helps me to invest time in vendor relationships that are most likely to produce a hire. Greenhouse organizes and shares feedback from interviews. Most ATS can collect, organize and share feedback but that is the main reason for having Greenhouse in the first place. Greenhouse allows our recruitment team to stay organized. It is helpful to see what communications were last had with a candidate.

I liked the event! All of the partnerships seems very helpful

I disliked the lunch - but that was about it

I would hope to solve bottle neck issues in our interview process

I like how organized the candidates are when they apply to a job req.

I hate how greenhouse sometimes does not add sourcing credit to candidates (and sometimes randomly removes ownership on existing candidates). Especially for recruiters, this is super important.

Able to organize a lot of pipelines on Greenhouse.

I like the levels of access that greenhouse can provide in terms of candidate privacy and confidentiality between hiring managers and other teams.

It's hard to navigate for folks who aren't in there every day, like hiring managers. Wish it had more data included on pipeline, we have to use tools like Ashby and Gem to get the whole picture.

Hiring, its nice to have a running record of folks in pipeline, but i wish it was easier to transfer all data over to different roles within our company.

I appreciate the ease of setting up jobs and the integrations that Greenhouse has adopted over the years. GH is a breeze to use, and as a coordinator, it's essential to have software that allows me to be agile when roles are opened or have changed. I love how key fields are set up, such as the JD field, info can be easily organized by department, and interviewer info is easy to access. In terms of integrations, GH syncs up with gcal, so you can easily see interviewers schedules, and it's been so helpful that it now syncs up with Zoom so we can easily schedule remote interviews and send out confirmations without having to toggle between multiple screens.

Zoom updates are hard to udate/ multi-panel interviews are hard to reschedule (usually you have to delete and start over...I wish there was a way to go into the 'schedule all feature' even after someone is schedule to update)

Multi-round interview scheduling, job posting to multiple sites, interview prep and candidate confirmation emails.

the opportunity to improve the system as long as you use it

it could be more user friendly especially for managers

none in particular

I do believe their are some good options around customization but have yet to see it used correctly. Our AM has been doing his best to be helpful.

It takes a lot of clicks to do simple things. Due to the ability to customize, making the system messy is very easy to do. Reporting is not very helpful. Updating posts is cumbersome.

We are solving organization of our recruiting process and trying to bring us to a place of best practices.

I like the following : 1.) The eye-pleasing interface 2.) Ability to send emails to candidates 3.) Tagging system to involved or concerned recruiter/interviewer 4.) Ability to monitor and track what stage the candidates is currently in 5.) Ability to link and direct applications from other online portals to Greenhouse

Greenhouse needs to improve on the following: 1.) Reports extraction 2.) Limitation of each user on jobs that they are not tagged 3.) Possibility for duplicate and multiple applicant profiles

Reports

Organization Scorecards Time to fill predictor

Not intuitive Can find the same information in several places Often information can be hard to find if you don't know exactly where to go Can accomplish the same task in a multitude of ways which is hard for non-superusers to navigate UX and UI could use some clarity, in particular during the application review stage. Not all file types render (in particular Word and PDF) Lack of pipeline view (who is in what stage) without having to pull a report Reports are often clunky and hard to pull easily Communication logs aren't stored centrally (again info in multiple places) Integrations aren't ideal Lack of training and access to reps / slow response time from CS

ATS - recruiting organization, reports, and storing prospects

Greenhouse is a standard ATS system. I like how Greenhouse tracks interview feedback and that there are a decent amount of email templates to select from.

1. We can't select whether we display the external job title or internal job title in the system. We would like to display the external job title in the system in order to differentiate between positions. 2. Req ID #s are not based on the last job that was created. They are based on the last time someone clicks the generate ID button. Therefore, you may see gaps between req #s. 3. Reporting options are limited. We do not have the ability to pull open and closed jobs without pulling a ton of other information that we do not need. 4. We would like to see arrows on the "all jobs" tab that allow you to move from position to position (similar to the arrows displayed when moving from candidate to candidate). 5. I think the actual user interface could use some updates. I would like to see candidates displayed by the stage they are in without having to use filters. Currently, candidates are displayed by the order they applied. 6. Greenhouse is one of the more expensive ATS. 7. Customer service is all via chat/email. There is no phone support.

Like any ATS, Greenhouse helps us track and pipeline candidates. It allows us to automate the majority of the recruitment process.

very customized feature, we can do lots of things on it

cannot review the application with Stars, either YES or NO to the application, so annoying

application tracking, nice feature

- integrations with Slack - organization of templates - ease of getting and reviewing applicant feedback

- confusing interface - conflicting language used in status areas - too many user levels

- made it easy to gather feedback on applicants by interviewers - applicant tracking in a singular spot - positing to multiple job boards at once

Greenhouse.io works great for recruiting purposes

Greenhouse Onboarding hardly transfers any information to ADP and makes it so that I have to continually enter information twice. Also, their customer service is not very good with tickets something not being closed in over a week.

Greenhouse is supposed to streamline our recruiting and onboarding process but it often does not.

Effective tool for logging candidate information and interview feedback.

Greenhouse works for my needs. More collaborative functionality could be helpful.

Hiring

it works as advertised and helps in recruitment

needs a better UI or UX to make it easier to use

recruitment

Greenhouse makes it very simple to refer candidates for positions and post open positions on social profiles , which is an effective driver of referrals.

The UI can be extremely confusing. Every time I try to find the roles that I am the hiring manager for so that I can see candidates who applied, I can never understand how to get there. The amount of dead space in the navigation makes me wonder whether the information architecture could be improved. Too many clicks to get places. I also think that charging additional for features that ensure fair hiring practices is a bit questionable from an ethics standpoint.

We're using Greenhouse to manage our candidate pipeline. It does that job fine.

Layout and formatting - though these are constantly changed

That everything is run on the job-level not the candidate level... making permissions and candidate sharing with team members a night mare. Activity feed can also be quite jumbled and admins should have the capability to delete various activity

accessibility for our more tech-savvy users; slows down however those business units not as tech-savvy