PeopleSoft Reviews

We primarily use the solution for our payroll needs and in human resources. These are the areas in which I have expertise. 

I am acquainted with versions 8.8 and 9.2.

The solution allows us to explore the databases and enables people to properly develop their work. 

The main issue we have with the solution is that it is very expensive. This presents an issue when it comes to tabulating the many tariffs which exist in Mexico. 

We find the technical support to be very difficult, as it is not local, and we tend to receive a response only the following morning. Response time takes very long and requires a person to be awake night and day to benefit from it. 

I have been working with PeopleSoft for the past 14 years. 

We have encountered no bugs or glitches with the solution. 

The solution is easy to scale, expand and make bigger. 

We find the technical support to be very difficult, as it is not local, and we tend to receive a response only the following morning. Response time takes very long and requires a person to be awake night and day to benefit from it.

Deployment takes a minimum of six months and I speak from the vantage point of someone who has a year-and-a-half of experience with my company, primarily in the area of implementation. 

The main issue we have with the solution is that it is very expensive. This is an issue when it comes to tabulating the many tariffs which exist in Mexico.

The calculating of the taxes in Mexico is an issue which many companies face, as this must be done every two weeks. 

I would recommend the solution to others. 

I rate PeopleSoft as an eight out of ten. 

I focus on financial supply chains and treasury modules in PeopleSoft. They're used by every one of my clients. Additionally, I have clients that use campus solutions and use payroll. The footprint is much larger than what I service.

PeopleSoft plays a crucial role in executing daily operations, generating reports, and managing procurement processes.

All the features of the solution are integral to the functionality. Additionally, the navigation customization is beneficial.

The solution could improve by offering PeopleSoft site licenses. Currently, Oracle is pushing for everyone to transition to the cloud, but clients are discontent with this approach. Offering new PeopleSoft site licenses would be the most beneficial for our clients.

The needs and preferences vary for each industry and client, but a recurring request has been for improved data analytics capabilities. The work centers have provided a useful tool for customizing the navigation, however, I believe the code needs to be optimized to increase efficiency. Clients often have demanding workloads, and when they all have customized work centers, it puts a strain on the system.

I have used PeopleSoft for approximately 22 years.

I rate PeopleSoft a ten out of ten.

PeopleSoft is our HR system. We used it for everything at my old company, including performance appraisal, leave application, employee, master database. This company only uses the performance management module, so we do goal-setting and appraisals through PeopleSoft. 

Mangement also plans to adopt the compensation module. They are currently only using a small part, but they want to use the full module.

Applications for employee leave used to be a problem. Now employees can check their own leave balances and apply for leave accordingly. The leave application automatically flows to the manager, and the manager can approve it also online. Employee performance appraisals are documented online, and past appraisals can be retrieved if needed. 

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.

I've been using PeopleSoft since 2011.

PeopleSoft is highly stable. They are still using the system.

Many businesses have been added, so PeopleSoft is highly scalable. We have 8,000 employees, but my previous company was a huge global organization with thousands upon thousands. 

Since I joined this organization, I haven't contacted Oracle support, but we implemented Oracle HRMS in my last company. This was back in 2005 or 2007. At the time, IBM was an implementation partner, and we interacted with Oracle's tech team. We went to Bangalore to meet them, and they were quite helpful.

I've worked for different companies, and each had its own ERP solution. My previous company was using Aramco, but they switched to Oracle. Then I another company with no HR system, so everything was manual, but they implemented SAP. 

I joined my current company in 2011, and they were using PeopleSoft, but they merged with another firm that was using SAP. Now we have a hybrid system. Some of our modules are SAP, and others are SuccessFactors or PeopleSoft. We're also using Cornerstone OnDemand for training, learning, and development. 

I rate PeopleSoft 10 out of 10. I think PeopleSoft is a good tool for HR administrators. It's easy to navigate compared to the other ERPs. The management of the tool is straightforward from the employee's perspective, so the employee experience is good. PeopleSoft is intuitive, so no one needs to be taught how to use the system. It's self-evident, like Facebook or Twitter. SAP is a little more technical, and you need to understand coding.

PeopleSoft is used for human capital management in my organization. It can manage a lot of business areas, such as payroll, time and labor, and absences.

The solution is very good and we have been using it for a very long time keeping us organized.

PeopleSoft is a good core system. It has a lot of functionality. They frequently update the solution and recently they have added some good enhancement features for higher education. We just switched to the new fluid interface and that is working very well for us. It is very good.

Employees can use PeopleSoft to input their time and their own absences. Additionally, they can look at their paychecks and configure their direct deposits.

PeopleSoft should be more flexible with the configuration. There should be less coding and more configuration.

I have been using PeopleSoft for approximately 30 years.

The solution is very stable, it is a senior or mature solution.

PeopleSoft is scalable. We are decreasing employees versus increasing right now, but it has worked well for us. We are using the solution extensively in our organization. We plan to increase usage.

We have approximately 9,000 employees using the solution in my organization.

The product strategist from PeopleSoft is very good. I have not contacted the support myself but I have heard they are good.

We have used other systems in the past. The organization is a University and we have been here for a long time.

The initial implementation is complex. Everything is complex when you first start using a new system. If someone tells you it is not complex, they can not be telling the truth. However, the most recent upgrade from 9.1 to 9.2 was pretty good.

When we first implemented the solution we used consultants but recently we did the upgrade of the solution in-house. We saved a lot of money.

We have an IT team of four who do the maintenance, checkups, updates and patching. Additionally, they answer user help requests. We have an additional three or four developers and administrators that help out during projects.

We are a University and the cost and license are negotiated privately.

We did a complete evaluation of other solutions, such as cost and customer responses, and we determined PeopleSoft was best suited for us as a University.

PeopleSoft is a stable solution and it has a lot of functionality. Additionally, it has good product strategist and user input support.

I rate PeopleSoft a nine out of ten.

It’s more configurable than it used to be. This makes it easier. You have opportunities where coding is not required and I think that’s the direction they are heading in, but if you have complex needs this does create an issue.

It has definitely evolved over time. I like the direction they are going in. It’s more robust now than it used to be, although sometimes that’s a good thing and sometimes a bad thing!

It requires more technical expertise to weed through code and see what’s happening behind the scenes to actually deliver a solution that the end user is happy with. They are trying to make it more flexible. It certainly requires more technical savvy expertise than in the past.

I have been working with PeopleSoft for around 15 years.

First deployment always takes a little work, and we came from the legacy system to the PeopleSoft world. Within the legacy world, we had three systems that didn’t really communicate with one another. I can’t say that it’s become easier over time, from our first implementation to what I deal with now. It’s a complex process, as it just depends on how many systems you are working with and maintaining. I think the first one was certainly easier than the upgrades that we have to deal with since.

We used legacy systems previously.

I would definitely recommend for people to look around at other vendor software. It of course depends on the needs of that business. I think it’s a good product it has its problems because the software is made to fit across many organizations as Oracle tries to make it fit across many industries. However, I definitely enjoy working with the software as I have been working with them for so long.

PeopleSoft is an HR management system.

The solution has benefited our organization, it has allowed us to be able to manage employees' information in the system.

PeopleSoft is resilient and has the flexibility for us to customize it.

One of the areas that could improve is the capability of utilizing mobile for some of the self-service activities that are missing. They are running on the older platform. What is happening is people are focusing on the cloud. PeopleSoft is a good provider and should into the cloud. That could be an advantage for them. Customers would not have to go find another solution that is a completely different platform that has different functionality altogether.

The solution is not that effective for mobile devices.

I have been using PeopleSoft for approximately 10 years.

PeopleSoft is stable and reliable.

The scalability is good for PeopleSoft.

We have approximately 6,000 people using this solution.

This solution is being extensively being used in my organization and we will increase usage as needed.

The technical support is average.

I would rate the technical support of PeopleSoft a three out of five.

The implementation is not difficult. The full deployment takes approximately one year.

We used consultants for the implementation of the solution. The solution requires a fair bit of maintenance and we have a five to ten-person team that looks after it.

My advice to those thinking about implementing this solution is it is a dying technology. If anybody wants to implement something similar they should be looking for new systems.

Oracle is not investing much into PeopleSoft. They are not enhancing it. However, they are doing some kind of change but it's not significantly enough, which could significantly help their business users.

I rate PeopleSoft a seven out of ten.

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.