Cegid Reviews

I have a wide variety of use cases because every kind of company and every type of payroll system has different ways of paying people. This solution provides a good way of paying people. We have about seven users in the company. I work as a senior consultant and we're a partner of Meta4.

The best feature of the solution is the payroll engine. Another good feature is that it's a tool that can be developed inside the existing tool. 

I think the areas of training and performance could be improved in the solution.

I've been using this product for 10 years. 

Stability of this solution is very good, it's a good product. 

In general, scalability is fine but sometimes the users are not very skilled at using the tool. It possibly requires more technical insight. 

The availability of technical support is very good.

I have used similar products in the past that have been local payroll providers. This solution has the advantage of being a tool that you can develop inside the same tool. 

Initial setup can be quite complex. 

Our partner company helped us with deployment. Depending on what is being deployed, it can take three or four people to implement. 

There is no fixed cost, the price depends on the number of employees you want to manage in the solution. In general, if you use the system for many users, the solution becomes cheaper.

This is a good product, but if you want to design new developments, you have to take that into account because it's not that easy. It is also important to sort out your internal processes before starting to use a tool like this.

I would rate this product an eight out of 10.

Our primary use for this solution is in Human Resources.

We have an on-premises deployment.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the payment engine.

I would like to have recruitment and acquisition features added to this solution.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use the on-premises version for our organizational structures.

Performance appraisal might be the most valuable feature for us.

The HR portal, training model, and development career model could all use improvement. Stability and scalability should be improved as well.

I would like table and mobile features to be released, but I believe it might already be there. We just don't have that version yet.

From zero to five I would give it a three for stability. It could also be improved.

The scalability should be improved. 

All the employees in our company use this solution.

Their technical support is not so good.

The initial setup was complex.

We used Meta4 directly to do our deployment.

Take care when constructing your company, to make sure you have a stable implementation. Also, upgrade every month. Otherwise, your version will be old and it will give you problems.

I would rate this solution as a six out of ten.

I am really impressed by the versatility and adaptability. It is easy to create concept payrolls ad-hoc. It is the most complete and customizable solution on the market. It facilitates reusability. It can integrate almost anything:

• Time management tools
• External training
• Planners
• Loads massive data
• Creates simple and quick reports
• Creates different levels of querying
• Exploits data intuitively

The modules cover all areas of an HR Department and can be adapted to scale with the company.

Among other advantages, the product includes interactions between manager and employee with the different HR processes, using the portals (configurable and scalable), MSS (Manager Self Service), and ESS (Employee Self-Service).

It has significantly streamlined the payroll processes and facilitated the distribution of fast and controlled access of information to each of the organizational levels.

Continuous improvements of Meta4 releases include a number patches, that are not always tested. It is common for them to be corrected later through hot fixes.

The product has been very accessible. Changes require the intervention of an expert, which increases the cost when customizing the installation.

Meta4 is investing in products that are more standardized and require less maintenance. The costs for implementation of the standard model should be adjusted downward.

I have used this product for over fifteen years.

There were only stability issues in the first versions. Currently, it is a mature product with more than fifteen years in the market. If the certification document installation instructions are followed, it is difficult to have problems with stability.

I did not encounter any scalability issues.

Technical support was effective, but unequal. I would give technical support a rating of 8/10. They often give the correct answer quickly, but not always.

We did use a previous solution and due to a lack of adaptation to the growth of the organization and its new needs, we switched.

Configuring parameters as 'look & feel' and other settings is simple.

However, the first parameterization module payroll (the more complex structure of the application) requires additional work, depending on the complexity of the type of payroll you want to implement.

The rest of the HR modules can be parameterized and initialized with more simplicity.

Scale beforehand to correctly adjust for the annual cost. Once obtained, consult with Meta4 for the cost of the SaaS solution. Compare both options and evaluate the results.

We evaluated PeopleSoft, SAP, and IntegRHo.

Above all, potential users must first evaluate their needs to see if the cost-benefit curve of the product is in line with their expectations. It is not the cheapest product on the market.

The two main features I use and appreciate are:

• Reporting (although it doesn't always work as intended)
• Candidate tracking for our requirements

Not at this time.

I would like to see:

• More robust reporting
• Changes to fields (they should be simpler)
• A more easily customizable solution

I have used TalentSoft for one year.

Recently, support has been excellent.

Prior to 2017, my team either had the wrong or ineffective service follow-up or they often looked for workarounds outside the system.

This has changed since we've better connected with the online service desk.

I'm not sure what we used before. We also track data in Excel worksheets for easy tracking.

Make sure to think about year-end reporting and important data during the setup so changes won't be necessary later.

• The flexibility of the salary processing engine allows for the full automation of complex business rules.
• All important data and configurations are time delimited. This allows for full history and for controlling when changes come into effect (either retroactively or programmed for the future).
• The "value assignation" model allows you to define values for different groups, and they will apply to all employee part of that group. For example, per location, per contract type, per company, per collective contract, etc.

If allowed us to fully automate payroll/salary processing for 6000 employees. This is now operated by only three people.

The vendor has replaced the e-Mind product with the PeopleNet product. This means that e-Mind is on life support and all R&D investment is going to PeopleNet. There is not direct migration path, so moving to PeopleNet is basically a reimplementation.

To put it bluntly, the e-Mind product is obsolete older technology, and
has no upgrade path for the new PeopleNet product.

I have been using this solution for about 20 years

The high flexibility of the payroll engine is a two-edged sword, as you can quickly build up complexity in your automation rules. Having experienced consultants in your implementation team can help a lot.

The version/build upgrades can be painful, since it is often required to run an update command on every client machine. If you can afford running the client as a remote desktop app, that can minimize the issue.

I found the system to be reliable and scalable. Scalability mostly depends on the database. For large installations, I have seen properly tuned Oracle databases perform well. The payroll engine is the fastest I have seen, even when compared with other products that don't support programmable salary rules, like Meta4.

The vendor's service team usually won't be much help for more complex issues.
But I've found experienced and competent consultants in the marketplace.

I'm moving to an HR solution implemented on MS Dynamics NAV, mainly because our current e-Mind installation is quite old, looks outdated, and its maintenance costs are growing.

The initial setup is not simple, since you usually want to implement your business automation rules, leveraging the product capabilities. You need an implementation project and proper project management.

I've been an implementation consultant for about 15 years. I have been an employee of a company using e-Mind for about five years. I recommend using a team of experienced consultants, independent from the vendor. In my experience, the vendor project implementation capabilities are sub-par.

You will probably see Meta4 PeopleNet, not e-Mind, which is the actively maintained product. But it is an evolution of e-Mind, and most of what I've said also applies.

PeopleNet brings many more features working out-of-the-box, so odds are that you can deploy it without much customization.

If you really need customizations, the product is also a complex development platform. The consultant experience and the project management will be key for a successful implementation.