Cegid Reviews

We installed Core HR for employee data. We use it to manage all the performance, objective settings, training requests, talent review, and the compensation review as well.

The solution is very helpful as it allows us to optimize and consolidate all the data for talent management. It helps to optimize some workflows and provides reporting capabilities. 

One of the most valuable features is the modular ability that allows customers to create customized forms to manage various processes, like performance reviews, exit interviews, or notice period assessments, without any technical skills.

There are difficulties regarding the reporting part. While we have some reporting functionalities, they are not powerful or deep. For instance, the coverage report on a specific effective date provides data effective on the day of the report, which is a significant limitation. 

Additionally, the available APIs, both inbound and outbound, are not well-developed, preventing the creation of accurate interfaces with other systems. There is also a need to review the reporting infrastructure to build a data lake that would allow customers to access data regardless of the effective date of the information. 

Moreover, the silos between the different modules need to be removed. Ideally, one would want a report that provides information at the same time from performance and compensation.

I have been working with Cegid for about seven years.

I would rate the stability of Cegid as an eight out of ten. It's a good solution.

The solution is not very scalable. As the company grows, it requires more analytical axes to data, but the system struggles to manage all the different analytical axes. 

Additionally, Cegid does not fit well with matrix organizations and organizations managed by business division rather than by country, causing difficulties in implementing rules and visibility and providing correct data based on users' responsibilities.

Over the years, the quality of customer service has improved, but initially it wasn't good. We often have to perform analysis ourselves before sending it to them for quality answers. 

The first response usually lacks depth, and if it were just an HR user submitting tickets, the outcome might be poor. Response times can be long, especially during peak periods at the end and beginning of the year.

Neutral

The setup was very easy, allowing us to be autonomous in administration and enhancement of the solution's functionalities without any technical skills.

The solution is very reasonably priced. 

I would recommend Cegid for a small company. I rate the overall solution a six out of ten.

I am working to find an ending solution for our needs currently for a group level.

Cost and time saving is the first improvement. We found room for many other initiatives in HR management, more linked with people management, development, and follow-up instead of administrative tasks. Additionally, we had returns on investment concerning competencies mapping. 

We are a multinational company needing people with specific knowledge for particular projects. The solution made it easier to understand the talent we had worldwide.

The primary feature I appreciate about the solution is the information connection, allowing us to have a full employee life cycle visibility over the platforms. It also enables the creation of interactions between employees, launching communication campaigns that raise engagement. 

From the HR side, the most valuable features are the Learning Management Systems (LMS) that allow providing a personalized service in terms of development, where each employee can choose and architect their development plans. 

The second valuable feature is the autonomy each employee has to update their personal data. In terms of talent management, it helps design development processes, backups, and clearly view the criteria for those backups being achieved.

There is room for improvements, such as including AI solutions for people management to improve job descriptions, recruitment reels, skills mapping, etc. 

Another interesting improvement could be subscription services for specific learning programs, consolidating all training and learning solutions into our LMS platform.

I have several years of experience, likely six or seven years.

The stability of the solution was quite okay during development. I would rate it a seven out of ten.

I would say the scalability is eight. We had more than 300 end users at that time.

It is hard for me to answer as we had a project management team inside our organization that bridged between our platform and their technical support. I did not have direct contact with their technical support.

Neutral

I used SuccessFactors previously. It was not in the same company.

The initial setup is quite easy and intuitive. There's just some extra features I would like, similar to those found in Talentia.

We have a project management team inside our own organization that handles deployment and communication with the platform developers.

The measurable ROI observed includes cost and time-saving. We could almost eliminate administrative tasks, achieve better workforce and resource allocation, centralize training, and improve competencies and career management.

The pricing is quite competitive. However, comparing it to Talentia, which offers more features for the same price, Talentia appears more competitive.

No other solutions were evaluated for this implementation. 

I would recommend this solution to other businesses.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

Meta4 is used as a human resource information system.

The most valuable features of Meta4 are payroll and resource recruitment. However, all of the features in the human resource system are useful.

Meta4 could improve by allowing users to manage things by themself.

I have been using Meta4 for approximately 10 years.

Meta4 required a lot of customization to fit our specific requirements for it to be stable.

Meta4 is scalable, we can use it for approximately 300 users.

I have used the technical support.

I rate the support from Meta4 a two out of five.

Neutral

The initial setup of Meta4 is complex. The full deployment took us approximately six months.

I rate the initial setup of Meta4 a two out of five.

We used a third party for the deployment of Meta4.

Meta4 requires annual maintenance that needs to be paid for.

My advice to others is to be specific about their requirements before implementing this solution.

I rate Meta4 a five out of ten.

The solution has a good LMS. The tool provides a lot of options.

The solution is a little bit slow. It has dependencies on HR data. We’ve also had some reporting challenges. We have to define the reports manually. We tried exploring all the options provided by the tool, but it didn’t work out for us.

I have been using the solution for two years.

We have switched to SumTotal due to some internal changes in our company.

Overall, I rate the tool a seven out of ten.

Our primary use cases are related to payroll.

The layer of customization is very high and this has improved our organization.

The most valuable feature is you can customize every type of payroll calculation that you have.

The user interface could be improved and the maintenance is complex when it comes to upgrades.

I have been using Meta4 for the past fifteen years.

I have not had any real issues with stability.

I would say the solution is scalable.

The initial setup is straightforward and not complex.

The deployment process as well is useful and easy to set up or configure or build a report because the same as the payroll, you can build any type of report that you need because the database is an open database and you can get the feel of the database.  The process takes a day to install depending on the complexities of the calculations.

From a cost perspective, I think this is a well-balanced option.

Meta4 is great for very large organizations and I would rate Meta4 an eight out of ten.

We have used this solution to capture employee-related information including visa and work permits, insurance, and cost centers. Employees can add their own academic information and make requests for loans. Over time, we set up the solution to assist with payroll and performance appraisals. 

As our company has grown, we have used this solution across a number of different countries including Lebanon, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, with each area having separate data. 

I am not using the most recent version of this solution so my recommendations are based on my use of 7.01 and the latest version is 8.0. 

The API could be enhanced and an accounting solution would be included. In future releases, it would be useful to see reporting lines of all the team members in our business to understand who reports to whom. It would also be useful if payroll for the Gulf countries could be possible. 

Lastly, the reporting and dashboards could be improved. We have had to develop a bar chart on the GSP pages to show important metrics to managers such as team absence and performance. 

We have been using this solution for 12 years. 

Meta4 is a stable solution. 

I have faced challenges in upgrading between versions of this solution, specifically relating to differences in naming conventions and needing to make changes for each object in the system. 

It is difficult for me to judge scalability as some of our requirements fall outside of the standard version of Meta4, specifically because the Gulf area is not accounted for. This is what has also caused some of the issues I have faced with upgrading between versions. 

The support team were friendly and work in a systematic way. When contacting support you are able to add a level of priority to your case which is always respected by their team. 

In stances where I needed support, their team would always assist me and in some instances, would log into team viewer to help. 

There was some complexity in the installation of this solution. We installed it on six servers and this was done by a Meta4 installation team. The installation was first on-premise and later moved to a data center which the installation team also helped with. 

It took a year and a half to complete the upgrades between versions. 

This solution would be good and more cost-effective than an SAP if you are only looking for HR functionality. The best approach would be to start with a trial and demo to understand what payroll options are available for your country. For companies in the Gulf area, I would not recommend this solution. 

I completed the setup of this solution on my own. The setup could be faster with a bigger team. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

• Meta4 HRIS implementer in our company across Lebanon and GCC countries. 
• Developed payroll engine for the GCC regions and for Lebanon.


• Write an API to generate the GL entries after each Payroll and send it to the Accounting System


• Configure various Performance Appraisal Processes (Top-Down  / 360 / Parallel Evaluation) + We developed an API to do Calibration outside META4, then save results inside META4

Meta4 HCM helps us consolidate HR data across various regions. Meta4 allows various performance appraisal techniques. The cumul engine for payroll is an asset. The Temporality or Historical Data Tracking within Time is high-valued, it allow the implementation of various Organizations Changes while keeping history. The Work Unit security help manage access when merging many branches under one Organization ID

Possibility to develop your own customization within Meta4 PeopleNet, which reduces the cost of customization services. It was like I was working on behalf of the vendor inside my company.

Possibility to develop many ESS Requests with related approval workflows (1 level / 2 levels). 

If Meta4 needs to expand to the Middle East and GCC region, the localization of payroll rules for these geographies needs to be embedded.

More than 14 years.

The Solution is stable, yet when the data became huge, the Payroll Users are facing slow execution of the Payroll. Because around 8 branches are executing payroll at same period of time, for 5000+ employees 

My Advice is to develop the Payroll Rules for the GCC, this will increase the market territory for META4 PeopleNet solution. it worth.

Our primary use case is to have as additional structure.

The performance appraisal is the most valuable feature. 

The HR portal, training model, and the development career model all need improvement. 

I have been using Meta4 for six to seven years. 

On a scale from one to five, I would rate the stability a three. It could be improved. 

The scalability also needs improvement. 

Their technical support isn't so good. 

Meta4 was already in place when I came to my company. 

The initial setup was complex. 

Meta4 did the integration for us. 

Make sure to use an integrator that will help you get a more stable implementation. Also make sure to upgrade every month because otherwise, you will get an old version and then it will cause problems.

In the next release, I would like for them to include the tablet and mobile features.

I would rate Meta4 a six out of ten. 

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.