PeopleSoft Reviews

For most of PeopleSoft's functionalities, everything is related to finance, to manufacturing, to service, and to sales and sales opportunities. The broad scope for most of the year includes these functionalities.

The feature that I have found most valuable is having the sources so that you're able to adapt the product to your needs. That was a big benefit. Then, when we chose Oracle, it was also for the graphical interface, which was already uploaded at that time. These are the two big advantages.

The area that could be improved is the upgrade process, it's not the easiest. Oracle stopped supporting our version. So we have to move either to the cloud or work in a non-supported situation. That was certainly a disadvantage. That's also the reason why we decided not to stay with Oracle. Now we are moving to SAP.

We have been using PeopleSoft for almost 10 year now.

Once the setup is done and it's tuned, it is very stable.

It is not that difficult to scale it. If you work in a virtualized environment it is easy to scale. You just have to add a CPU and memory and reboot the thing, and you have the necessary performance. In a RAC environment, you add another member in your cluster, and then you have more performance.

Technical support for the database, for the Linux environment, and for the virtualization layer, is great. However, for the functional PeopleSoft support, we were not that happy. The first thing they say is, "you have to upgrade to the next version, and if the problem is still there, please call us again." That was a little bit difficult. We weren't satisfied with the functional support. For the database, for the virtualization platform, and for the Linux, that was very good.

The initial setup is rather complex, depending on what you want. If you want to set up a RAC environment, then it's more complex and you need additional hardware. You need a skilled Oracle DBA. If you keep it to a single INSERT, it's simpler.

We have an enterprise agreement, which is great because you don't have to look to the number of users every year. You have to send the results of the company to Oracle, and depending on the limits that were defined in the contract by module, you see if you exceeded those limits or that you stayed within them. Then you have to buy additional products and support. It is a flexible model, but it only goes up. So if you come during a more difficult period, like last year with Corona, it never goes down.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give PeopleSoft an eight.

To raise that score they would have to improve the upgrade path to the cloud.

The advice I would give to others who are looking into implementing PeopleSoft is to go directly for the cloud product. Don't do it on-prem. Go directly for the cloud product.

We implement this solution for our clients. Some of our clients use the on-prem version and some on cloud. We either do our own private hosting or use a public platform depending on the client. If public, we generally use AWS or Oracle. I work with clients in higher ed or the public sector and they're generally looking for a more updated solution than they're currently using. We are partners with Oracle. 

I think PeopleSoft is a solid solution. It has a lot of the basics. If the system is used properly it meets the needs of the customer. I think it's a very strong, solid product, very mature. I haven't heard of any issues from our clients. The solution has PeopleTools as a feature which allows for customization and provides flexibility.

I think PeopleSoft should focus on enhancing the tools and the UI, and making it a more updated app as opposed to the old, tiny, older look and feel. That's where they should put their efforts.

I've been implementing this solution for over 26 years. 

I would rate this solution a 10 out of 10. 

This is primarily used as a business system.

The time system is what we get the most benefit from.

We needed to do a lot of integration with third-party applications in order to get the functionality that we needed.

The API integration could be better.

I have been working with PeopleSoft for more than ten years.

We have experienced a couple of bugs while working with PeopleSoft.

We have been in touch with technical support and feel that it was good, keeping in mind the scope. They do not support third-party applications, but for what they are responsible for, it is good.

The initial setup was straightforward and didn't give us any trouble. However, when we had to integrate many other modules, it was an extensive process.

This is a good product and I recommend it, although it depends on the use case for the business. There are advantages and disadvantages and you need to consider the objective. On this basis, every organization measures differently, but I definitely recommend it. That said, there is no perfect product.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Our primary use case is for HCM. It has very few clicks before getting data. Reporting is easy to retrieve, both ad-hoc and fixed reports. There can be more visualization. 

Productivity has improved. It provides HR Professionals with easy input of data and dashboard reporting. ESS and MSS save time for HR. The pushing of learning materials and performance management helps to increase effectiveness and responsiveness. 

The recruiting is most valuable. It saves time in having easy and fast applicants tracking as well as candidates' contact plus pipeline management. Parsing of CVs is productive but accuracy can be improved. 

Reporting is easy to create, even for complex ones. Visualization is almost nonexistent and can be improved. It's good to be able to eport to PDF and excel with fast timing.

I have been using PeopleSoft for two years. 

We primarily use the solution's HCM suite for HR.

The customizations allow us to come up with a lot of complex labor rules. In the Philippines, there's a lot of different kinds of rules you need to be in compliance with. The solution offers up a lot of flexibility and customization that is perfect for our region's requirements.

The HR features are the solution's most valuable aspects.

The payroll aspect of the solution needs improvement only because a lot of the enhancements with PeopleSoft are obviously geared towards the North American region. It's not geared well towards us as a small market in Southeast Asia. A local market model that's easily configurable and can be deployed as quickly as possible to different companies here in Southeast Asia would be very helpful. If we could integrate a lot of localizations that would apply it to areas in Southeast Asia that would be much better.

The stability of the solution is okay.

The scalability of the solution is fine. We're using a private cloud. If we do get different organizations that have a larger workforce, then it's just a matter of additional web and app servers. If there are any requirements, we just need to expand the specifications for the database site, which means, in terms of scalability, there are no issues. Right now, we have over 10,000 users on the solution. I'm unsure if we will increase usage in the near future.

On a scale of five, I'd rate technical support at 2.5. 

Often support just asks people to install a lot of upgrades. Sometimes they don't really give you clear details as to why you need to upgrade. They just say, "You need to upgrade this because there's a newer image, etc". They never really give you the reason underlying why you are having errors.

The initial setup has a moderate amount of difficulty. Deployment took about eight to ten months. For maintenance, we need around 25 to 30 people.

We pay a yearly licensing fee.

I'm a consultant; I've used the solution for five years and have marketed the solution for two years.

We handle the private cloud deployment model with Amazon as the cloud provider.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. If they offered easier integration, and maybe a broader library of APIs that can be utilized by third-party integrations, I'd rate the solution higher.

Our clients' primary use case of this solution is for paying their employees. 

People who are willing to learn the technology and follow the correct procedures can improve the way their organization operates. So from that perspective, there have been one or two of my clients where things have worked out for them, and they've moved on with version 9.2. They were happy with at least eliminating a number of issues that they were encountering prior to not using that functionality. 

The answer to this question will vary from one client to another. Some Clients are more focused on the processes of how it's working within the system. Others are more focused on what they can improve by using more PeopleSoft features. Most of them are not sure what functionality has given them more leisure towards doing things manually. Most of the time issues are around customizations that are part of standard practice which is at times hard for clients to get rid of and that process becomes a habit and the resistance is noticed not only from employees but by the organization as a whole, which I think is not very productive. 

The documentation is very easy but it becomes an issue when users don't know how critical it is for them to follow that documentation. If users don't follow the documentation, it is useless. And as soon as they have an issue, they blame PeopleSoft. As soon as they cannot figure something out, they play the blame game. 

There is always room for improvement, but I find that people are moving over to working on the cloud more now. So now developers don't have any more to add because cloud is like the place to go. But perceptions differ, and I still feel that it's better if it were on-premises, because there is always the possibility of errors while working on the cloud. Data might get lost, for instance.  

From what I've heard, the solution is very stable.

The new version of this solution is very scalable.

Some clients are hesitant to get rid of some of the customizations that they are used to and being able to pick up the versatility provided by Oracle to make their life easier. They are hesitant to adapt to the system and then they won't be able to pick up and go on cloud. The deployment for version 9.2 took about four to six months, depending on how large the project or the scope is. Deployment on cloud depends on if they are going by face to face, and it will take anywhere from three to four months because they give patches. These patches are pretty straightforward. 

The licensing cost for PeopleSoft is 3,500 per course and the annual subscription fee is 6,500. That is rather expensive. I am not sure, but I believe there are some hidden costs.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. 

There could be more adaptability of the system because obviously it's much better now with being able to do your own reports and navigate around, which was not the case in the past. Perhaps the developers can also work on better reporting because I think there is still room for improvement in that area. My advice to others would be to believe in the system. This solution has the potential of making life easier, so it is just a question of adaptation to it. If users are willing to give the system a chance, it should work for them.

We primarily use the solution for Campus Solutions, HR and finance.

We find the Campus Solutions very valuable. Right now, we're working on making the same service for the students.

The solution needs to work on its mobile technology. We're hoping in the next version we're working on implementing, 9.2, will have more of this.

There are some compatibility issues that the solution should address in future releases.

The stability of the solution is good.

The solution's scalability is good.

There's a moderate level of complexity in the initial setup. It's somewhere between easy and difficult.

We are using the on-premises deployment model.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

The solution could have better processes and automation, or features that allow for a paperless environment.

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. We have about 100 users on it currently.

We use the on-premises deployment model.

I would recommend the solution. It's very stable and scalable, which makes it a reliable solution.

I would rate the solution seven out of ten.