We performed a comparison between Microsoft Dynamics GP and PeopleSoft based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two ERP solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is easy to use."
"I haven't used it a lot, but the best thing is that the processes are very detailed."
"The solution offers integrations with other software as well. We have integration with Microsoft Office where we can do Word and Excel, etc."
"The fixed assets, payroll, the data module, and user-friendliness are most valuable."
"We have gained the capability to control and address various issues within the financial module effectively."
"The most valuable feature is financial control. The accounting aspect allows us to manage our clients and payments."
"It is a tried and tested ERP system which if used correctly, is definitely a very good program for managing all aspects of a business from customer sales, and receivables management, to payable management and finance reporting. So, it's super critical for any mid-sized company."
"It's enhanced by a subscription billing add-on, to efficiently automate billing and invoicing, particularly due to our substantial customer database."
"PeopleSoft is mostly used for payroll and core HR functionality. Some customers use it for its finance module."
"PeopleSoft allows you to schedule upgrades and inform users beforehand. This gives your IT team time to manage the implementation and minimize disruption."
"I would recommend the solution. It's very stable and scalable, which makes it a reliable solution."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"All the features of the solution are integral to the functionality. Additionally, the navigation customization is beneficial."
"Job data is a valuable feature."
"PeopleSoft has been fairly reliable for us. We haven't had any issues with stability."
"It's great for helping users deal with their supply chain."
"It requires a lot of expertise to implement."
"There should also be extra redundancy when posting to modules. We use different sets of books such as CashBook and CheckBooks therefore if I select the wrong one the solution allows the transaction to just pass without warning."
"The issue we're encountering is that it's primarily designed for independent installations and not initially structured as a cloud-based solution, which has led to challenges with connectivity."
"Many of our customers are migrating to the cloud rather than staying on-premises."
"It still can be improved in web-based and build reporting. "
"The biggest problem with GP is that it's not cloud based and it doesn't lend itself to subscription licensing. But Microsoft wants everything in the cloud and licensed on a subscription basis.Even tThough GP can be deployed on a cloud server, but basically, it's a Windows based product. It uses the older model and companies purchase the program and pay a 16-18 sixteen- eighteen percent annual renewal fee but Microsoft wants everybody to pay monthly or annual renewal fees on a subscription basis."
"As for room for improvement, they have different modules, project and analytical accounting, but it will be good to have that kind of part in the standard package. To have that additional reporting functionality where you can add an attribute or something, which you can report again. So you can analyze the cost by not just natural accounts but also by a project, without having to go through another module edit on top and then the other module edit on top. The more modules you add, sometimes it doesn't work that well. Additionally, it would be easier to have the solution on the cloud. That's our consideration. We are trying to move all our systems to the cloud, and GP is one of them that we are going to move in the next couple of years. I would rate the solution seven or seven point five out of ten."
"As technology changes, I would say probably in the area of chart up account needs improvement because chart up account is a string. So if they make it more flexible."
"PeopleSoft lacks integration capabilities."
"This solution could be improved by lowering the cost of support."
"The product was too complicated when it came to navigating through multiple places and the search filters weren't great."
"I would like to see better support, bug fixing, and documentation."
"The Time and Labor module is not that flexible."
"I think the inventory part it should be simplified. There is the GR, or good receipt note, which is the time that the materials comes in, and the work days, 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 a better clarity over it."
"The solution could have better processes and automation, or features that allow for a paperless environment."
"Having applications which provide more enhanced features and user-friendly elements."
Microsoft Dynamics GP is ranked 13th in ERP with 22 reviews while PeopleSoft is ranked 12th in ERP with 80 reviews. Microsoft Dynamics GP is rated 7.8, while PeopleSoft is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft Dynamics GP writes "A user-friendly solution for accounting and sales purchase model with all options in one frame". On the other hand, the top reviewer of PeopleSoft writes "Comprehensive solution for SCM but requires add-ons for fluid pages". Microsoft Dynamics GP is most compared with Microsoft Dynamics AX, Oracle E-Business Suite, Epicor ERP, SAP ERP and SAP S/4HANA, whereas PeopleSoft is most compared with Oracle HCM Cloud, Workday, Oracle Fusion Cloud ERP, SAP SuccessFactors and SAP ERP. See our Microsoft Dynamics GP vs. PeopleSoft report.
See our list of best ERP vendors.
We monitor all ERP reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
