PeopleSoft Reviews

I work with many industries, and my most recent work was in the public sector. Currently, I am helping a public sector client manage the supply chain and operations. I deal mostly in operations, inventory, supply chain management, as well as on the finance side, including general ledger, accounts payable, and purchasing.

The customizability to exactly match the requirements of the customer is what I appreciate about PeopleSoft.

PeopleSoft is entirely flexible internally within the ecosystem and is completely customizable with delivered integrations to many other third-party products.

PeopleSoft enforces the rules, so nobody can bend the interpretation of any regulatory requirement.

I have not found another product that even comes close to PeopleSoft. PeopleSoft can secure a page, a table, a process, down to the field if required. It is fantastic at security.

More delivered artificial intelligence functionality in operations and finance would be helpful.

I have worked with PeopleSoft for more than twenty years.

First-level support is poor, but second-level support has been fantastic.

I would say their support is not only through person and email response but includes invaluable documentation. Everything in PeopleSoft is documented, and quite often, I can find my answers through the documentation. I have not found any other enterprise resource planning systems that are as well documented or as easily searchable as PeopleSoft.

I have not used JD Edwards in the last year. I am familiar with it, but not as familiar as PeopleSoft.

The pricing is customer-specific, so I am not generally privy to what the pricing for licensing is. However, generally, I think PeopleSoft is certainly cheaper than cloud solutions.

I moved away from Dropbox, Dropbox Sign, and Dropbox Enterprise a while ago, so I have no idea what they are doing now. I am in the last month starting to look at Odoo, which is a financial enterprise resource planning system.

I have just completed three assessments: one on inventory demand planning, another on using artificial intelligence to bring supplier contracts in portable document format directly into PeopleSoft.

PeopleSoft works both internally as well as with third-party products that integrate seamlessly with PeopleSoft.

PeopleSoft operates both from a need-to-know-only basis as well as being able at the same time to do group purchase and realize large quantity purchase discounts.

My clients have used marketplaces, and it is really industry-specific whether they use one or not, or if there is even one available.

I would rate this product nine out of ten.

I work on PeopleSoft HCM, Oracle PeopleSoft HCM. It's an HCM solution that manages employees, their payroll, and everything from hire to retire.

PeopleSoft is on-premises and does not support any SaaS solution at the moment. It offers on-premises and hybrid deployment to the cloud, with some infrastructure deployed in an infrastructure as a service provider.

There are no significant challenges as it's an on-premises product. It provides enough capacity to manage the product yourself, whether installed in the cloud or in your own on-premises data center. The beauty of using the on-premises solution is having customizations according to business requirements, because business requirements are not always aligned with the out-of-the-box product. You have to customize and tune it according to the business process and requirements.

The support is medium quality through the Oracle support portal. It's neither exceptionally good nor particularly bad.

PeopleSoft is a very nice and effective product. Although Oracle is not encouraging it because they are promoting their Oracle SaaS solution. This is understandable as Oracle invested significantly in their SaaS solution and are marketing it intensively. That's the reason PeopleSoft is getting somewhat sidelined. However, PeopleSoft as a product remains excellent, and being an on-premises solution means you have control of everything.

I have been using this solution for more than 12 years.

For upgrading the products, Oracle releases a patch for each quarter. It takes around three to four days to do the installation and make the environment ready. For product deployment, it takes around two days to make the environment up and running in a skilled manner.

There are no problems with complexity. The out-of-the-box solution and API gateways are installed. PeopleSoft is installed on a DMZ zone, which cannot be accessed by all other vendors. The API gateway connects to the DMZ zone and connects in the same way to third parties.

PeopleSoft is an industry-proven software that has been around for almost 20 years, so it can handle any kind of complexity.

Security is implemented through the APIs using OAuth-based authentication.

Neutral

The implementation requires two people because it's on-premises and our own infrastructure. Two people are sufficient for the implementation.

There are several out-of-the-box solutions that we validate to check whether they fit the business requirements. We try to leverage and use the Oracle delivered product, the out-of-the-box solution. In some cases, if the out-of-the-box solution doesn't work, or the business process and requirements are quite different, we have to align with the business process because ultimately, the business will use the solution. We have to align with their requirements and create a bolt-on solution accordingly if requirements do not match the out-of-the-box solution.

PeopleSoft is a very nice and effective product. Although Oracle is not encouraging it because they are promoting their Oracle SaaS solution. This is understandable as Oracle invested significantly in their SaaS solution and are marketing it intensively. That's the reason PeopleSoft is getting somewhat sidelined. However, PeopleSoft as a product remains excellent, and being an on-premises solution means you have control of everything. I rate PeopleSoft an eight out of ten.

The use cases for PeopleSoft include hospitality industrial management, primarily in the financial sector, education, and healthcare sectors.

Regarding the features of PeopleSoft, the product emphasizes usability, durability, and customer satisfaction. For newcomers, cloud-based ERP technologies are available, while existing customers continue using their current systems.

This applies to both HCM and Finance sectors. Customers in the financial sector use PeopleSoft for financial supply chain management systems and human capital management (HRMS).

PeopleSoft HCM focuses on comprehensive design development with automated solutions. Everything in the dashboard is synchronized and automatic. Organizations simply need to install the ERP and utilize it, which is why most organizations focus on PeopleSoft HCM. For custom applications in finance, integration is less expensive than other ERPs when connecting with third-party applications. It provides the easiest way to integrate with third-party applications for data exchange between systems.

The solution provides better outcomes with customer-specific and customer-centric features. Companies utilizing the ERPs receive benefits according to their group classifications, as reported by Forbes.

PeopleSoft is affordable for existing customers only, not for new customers.

The popularity is declining for several reasons. Resources are moving to cloud solutions such as Workday cloud. Even though it is the same Oracle environment, professionals are transitioning due to challenges in availability, scalability, and resource allocation.

When there are limited hiring opportunities for a particular technology, professionals must consider switching technologies either internally within their organization or personally. If a project ends and someone is placed on bench without new opportunities, they often need to switch to technologies with more market demand. Currently, resources are frequently moving to other ERP systems such as Workday, SAP, Mulesoft, and Salesforce, as there are numerous ERP systems in the marketplace.

I have been working with PeopleSoft for 18 years.

For basic deployment, it can take a maximum of one day.

For live deployment, it typically takes a minimum of one week, depending on the number of employees, customers, and stakeholders involved. In the financial sector, it consumes more time, but HCM implementation typically takes up to one week to implement, deploy, and go live.

The maximum deployment time is one month, accounting for the testing phase and various factors such as the number of vendors, suppliers, customers, and warehouse locations for shipping items. HCM deployment is simpler as it mainly involves data conversion.

Everything in PeopleSoft is automated. If issues arise, they are fixed quickly. Small issues take maximum one to two hours to resolve, while major issues take up to 12 hours. This efficiency is possible because they have cloud backup systems.

On a scale of one to ten, PeopleSoft's scalability rates at eight. This rating reflects the limitation that custom applications do not receive support.

Currently, PeopleSoft provides service only for the latest versions and existing PeopleSoft customers. They address delivery-related issues but not custom issues. For example, if a customer designs custom applications and encounters issues, PeopleSoft will not provide service for those custom applications. They only provide support for delivered applications.

Positive

I maintain my own environment with both PeopleSoft and Workday infrastructures.

Workday currently holds 12% market share while PeopleSoft HCM has 10%. This difference is primarily due to cost factors. While Workday is newer, PeopleSoft has established architecture, end-to-end transactions, usability, and methodologies.

Integration is simpler in PeopleSoft compared to Workday, which has more complex coding standards. PeopleSoft automatically generates code, making it easier to integrate with third-party or internal systems. Workday lacks such features and requires manual coding.

Resources are increasingly moving to cloud solutions, including Workday cloud. This transition is driven by challenges in availability, scalability, and resource allocation. When market opportunities become limited in a particular technology, professionals must consider switching to technologies with more demand.

I am using both cloud and on-premises solutions in my personal system. I have purchased the PeopleSoft version and maintain my own server and database for my company initiative.

I have connections with Oracle head sales, business strategy, and strategic partner heads. I developed a personal HR system for small-scale organizations.

The cost depends on organizational factors such as the number of applications, cloud infrastructure, number of employees, and geographical presence. For international operations with multiple regions, costs are higher compared to local operations.

PeopleSoft remains viable in the market for existing customers but will not be available for new customers after 35 years. It is more beneficial for existing customers who understand the system, while new customers face challenges in training and environment setup.

Based on these factors, I rate PeopleSoft eight out of ten but would not recommend it to future users.

I've worked with HR, payroll, benefits, time and labor, health and safety, and every module. I've also worked on different modules for the education, health, and financial sectors. My 25 years of experience cover different industries and implementations. I've also worked in the public sector, which is a bit different. I implemented PeopleSoft for the state of Massachusetts, covering 168 schools, colleges, and universities.

Regarding technical support, they often discourage using PeopleSoft and push for Oracle. Many support staff are offshore and don't understand the system well.

The solution is good for stability. It's more mature software. Oracle has bundled PeopleSoft into Oracle Cloud and sells it as that.

PeopleSoft's scalability is pretty good. Oracle is more difficult than the tool because it's newer. It has been around since 1984-85 and has matured.

If implemented correctly, the return on investment for PeopleSoft is pretty good. However, the ROI for Oracle and SAP is not as great - they're very expensive.

The product's cost depends on the number of people in your company or the number of paychecks processed. They charge based on these factors, plus a maintenance fee. I'm not sure about current pricing since Oracle took over.

I think PeopleSoft HR is pretty good and very mature. The people who built PeopleSoft now work on Workday. Workday has asked me to join them as an employee a few times, but I don't take anyone's employment because Workday isn't very user-friendly. With PeopleSoft, you can do a lot. Oracle now bundles PeopleSoft and calls it Oracle Cloud, but the programs are the same. Recruiters often don't know this and say you're not qualified if you don't have Oracle Cloud experience. However, Oracle has just put PeopleSoft in the cloud and packaged it as Oracle Cloud.

Overall, if the solution is implemented correctly, it runs very smoothly. I think people shouldn't customize it. They should use it as is and try to adapt to it. Many people didn't understand PeopleSoft at first. For example, during COVID, some companies hired offshore people who didn't know what they were doing and messed everything up.

You need to know the rules and regulations of the country where you're implementing the tool because every country has different rules for HR, benefits, and payroll. Canadian payroll differs from US payroll, but they're on the same platform in the solution. It's a very mature system, but people prefer newer options like Oracle Cloud.

I was also involved with SAP S/4HANA. I don't think it's good for the government sector because government workers are a bit lazy about technical things. I understand S/4HANA because I have a technical background. It has a different structure, while PeopleSoft has more of a file and table structure, which is easier. If the tables are set up wrong, things go wrong. But if you know how to set it up correctly, it runs smoothly, and you can adjust it if needed.

The problem is that companies are hiring big consulting firms that want money. They hire offshore people who don't know the country's rules and do programming. If you buy a package and still have to do custom programming, why buy the package at all?

These days, I'm doing a lot of business process reengineering for people because they don't know how to implement it correctly. If you implement it right, you can reduce manual work. However, it depends on change management and how senior management handles it.

It works fine if you implement the tool on-site or hybrid, not cloud and do it correctly. But in a cloud situation, there are problems. Many countries change their payroll and benefits rules often. With the cloud, you can't easily change things. You have to ask the company to make changes, which costs much money.

People who don't want an IT department go for the cloud. But I've seen many companies fail with the cloud. The cloud is just everything packaged together. Your data sits in someone else's cloud, and you must accept whatever they do. Payroll is very sensitive. If payroll is wrong, the whole company suffers.

I've worked on the financial and school sides, too. I'm comfortable with the tool if it's implemented correctly. But many companies don't implement it right, which is why they might say it is too much.

I did a big project for an oil and gas company. I was a program control manager with 51 people under me. We used Oracle, but Oracle isn't as good as PeopleSoft for payroll.

If the solution is implemented correctly, it's fine. But you need the right implementer. Big consulting firms often give wrong information and use inexperienced people.

For maintenance, PeopleSoft sends updated rules to new tables at year-end. You compile the new tables and start the new year. But you need to know which changes apply to your country.

I talk to many senior PeopleSoft people and always get LinkedIn messages about business opportunities. I now help about 50 clients when they have problems, but I'm not traveling. If you know the HR and payroll business well, you can implement anything - PeopleSoft, Oracle, or S/4HANA. I've done all of these.

S/4HANA is more complicated and technical. It's similar to an old software called IDMS. You have to be very technical, and if you don't do it right, it won't work.

I rate the overall solution a seven out of ten. 

I use it for all our employee engagement activities, managing all our employee databases, compensation, and benefits.

Prior to this, I used another solution. This solution has a good interface. 

The customization and catering to our specific needs have helped. There are obvious benefits. 

The streamlining process is accelerating, and it has helped me. It aids me from an auditing perspective, as it's all system-driven, and cannot be altered.

The ease of integration needs improvement. However, the other software should be in the same language or communicate effectively.

I have used it for about eight years now.

I can't think of anything that's super critical and has significantly hampered operations.

For my needs, there have been no issues with scalability or additional features needed. The only potential concern might be with integration.

Prior to this, I used another solution. I don't recollect which one. It was very manual and lacked a good interface.

After setup, I conducted three or four months of testing. All the initial issues were resolved, so it was fine.

The overall product rating is eight out of ten. 

The review will be sent, and I will publish it in written and audio format, making it available to other users. You may edit your review at any time, and it might be available to third parties.

I deploy PeopleSoft in government, healthcare, insurance, and non-profit sectors.

The most valuable feature is the module integration, which saves time through transclusion - using a single record across multiple modules.

The user interface has improved significantly. The current client redesigns work centers per subsidiary business unit, making navigation more intuitive and easier for end users. Reporting and analytics capabilities have greatly improved. 

Areas for improvement include implementing/upgrading tools and documentation. The Oracle support website can be difficult to navigate.

I have been using the product for 24 years. 

I rate the product's stability a nine out of ten. 

I rate PeopleSoft's scalability a ten out of ten. 

The tool's support responds within 24 hours, though the level of support depends on the client's service level agreement.

Positive

I have experience with other ERP systems like Dynamics, NetSuite, JD Edwards, and Oracle Cloud. Each has strengths, but PeopleSoft's procurement and supply chain management are particularly robust. JD Edwards is stronger in warehousing and distribution.

The initial setup complexity depends on the client's desired level of customization. While much is configurable, extensive customization increases complexity.

I could deploy a module within a couple of weeks.

Deployment typically involves functional resources, technical resources, and client subject matter experts. Teams are usually large due to the size of client organizations (typically companies with tens or hundreds of millions in revenue).

Deployment time varies depending on the number of modules and the amount of historical data to be migrated. It could range from weeks to months, with complexity increasing if mapping to legacy systems is required.

The solution is priced per module. 

My advice for any ERP implementation, including PeopleSoft, is to allow adequate time for documentation, as this is often a weakness in ERP projects.

I would recommend PeopleSoft to others.

Overall, I rate it a nine out of ten. 

We use a lot of typical cases from PeopleSoft, for example, solutions for security, business performance, monitoring processes, and a lot of training.

The main thing is that it's very easy to manage and create new processes or training calls.

In my opinion, it needs more performance, maybe something technical related, because it's very slow for us and even small activities take a while.

I have been using PeopleSoft for two years. 

I would rate the stability a seven out of ten. 

I would rate the scalability a five out of ten. There are 200 end users using this solution. 

The solution is used once to twice a week. 

The customer service and support are good. 

Positive

I would rate my experience with the initial setup a six out of ten, with ten being very easy because the setup is not quite easy enough.

The deployment took a few days. 

An integrator helped with the deployment process. Five people were involved. It's our typical integration team size.

Three people are involved in the maintenance. It's manageable with that team size.

There is a return on investment. 

I would rate the pricing an eight out of ten, with ten being expensive. 

It is an expensive product. 

I would recommend it.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

It's accounting software. The end result is generating the balance sheet and income statement, and it helps track all the transaction flows.

I’ve been involved with both FSCM and HCM implementation. So, I've used PeopleSoft across various functionalities.

In general, as well as specifically with PeopleSoft, ERP systems have replaced or reduced the overreliance on spreadsheets in financial applications ad hoc database functionality in HR.

The constraints of uploading spreadsheets for journal entries can be a headache and ultimately, ERP systems force users to rethink their approach, both in terms of spreadsheet format and reliance. PeopleSoft helps automate much of the heavy lifting, reducing the reliance on spreadsheets.

Moreover, PeopleSoft has been beneficial for the HR and financial departments in two ways. The ability to segregate positions and the underlying structure is beneficial for HR. 

Additionally, the payroll features, including the ability to separate payroll processing for different regions and countries and then consolidate everything for final reporting (balance sheet, income statement), are valuable for both departments.

I liked the breadcrumb approach to navigation. More recently, the Work Center functionality was a good innovation. And finally, PeopleSoft’s acquisition of nVision has been a good move.

I do like the Work Center concept. It consolidates tasks based on user roles. However, I believe PeopleSoft could enhance the Work Centers concept further still. 

Additionally, PeopleSoft's user interface could be more intuitive and user-friendly, similar to Workday's graphical user interface.

I have been implementing PeopleSoft 9.x, since the early 2000’s.

I wrote/published a paper years ago about the high failure rate of ERP implementations. And I knew the number would be high. But then once I dug a little deeper into it, interviewed project leaders, and read previous papers, I was quite surprised by conservatively saying that implementations fail almost 50% of the time.

Now, "fail" is a very broad definition. Let's take it as, "How badly did it fail?" The severity can vary greatly, from minor interface glitches like weird lines across the screen or the customization being so extreme that when they bring on a new upgrade or a new feature, it negatively impacts things. So again, failure is a very broad term, but I was surprised how often that happens, and this is not just true for PeopleSoft, it's true with SAP and Oracle and so forth. It's a complicated
implementation. It's not just like downloading TikTok or something. It takes some expertise.

I have also implemented Workday, SAP, and Oracle as well. Each has its merits and drawbacks.

Each has its strengths and weaknesses, so the best choice depends on your organization's specific needs. Here are some factors to consider:

 Complexity: How complex is your organization? Is it multinational?

 Features: What specific features are you looking for?

 IT Staff: How many IT personnel do you have on staff? Do you regularly maintain the system?

PeopleSoft, for example, allows you to schedule upgrades and inform users beforehand. This gives your IT team time to manage the implementation and minimize disruption.

On the other hand, take Workday as an example. It's simpler in terms of IT staffing because updates automatically roll out. One day you're working with one interface, and the next day it might change due to an overnight update by Workday. The advantage here is not needing IT staff to manage the transition. 

However, the downside is that updates occur at Workday's discretion, possibly without adequate time to inform all stakeholders about changes they'll encounter. Ultimately, the decision depends on your organization's needs and its capacity to manage change going forward.

I was typically more involved in the change management aspect, keeping leadership informed and working as a liaison between the developers and users. I'm also involved in the training aspect of implementations. 

None of them are inexpensive. Consider the resources at hand and going forward for maintenance.

It boils down to two things: before you buy and after you buy.

Before you buy:
 Do your due diligence: Understand your organization's needs and capabilities.
 Evaluate your existing infrastructure: Assess your company's "capacity" to ensure
compatibility.
After you buy (post-selection):
 Choose your SI (Systems Integrator) carefully.
 Implement change management from the outset.
 Involve your training staff throughout the process.
The more you keep people informed, the fewer issues you're going have. Finally, assuming the System Integrator is top-notch and does a great job, make sure you have a training staff that is compatible with not only the developers, but also the Change Management folks.

It's really a three-legged stool of Project, Change, and Training Management. Or to use a different analogy, there are three different swimming lanes, and they all need to work in concert, communicate and work together.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. When Oracle bought them, those who implemented PeopleSoft were worried. People said, "PeopleSoft's dead. Oracle's going to kill them. Going to suffocate them." But thankfully, the user base was so loyal. That's what kept them alive. That's why we're still talking about PeopleSoft.

We use the PeopleSoft solution for financial and supply chain management modules.

The breadcrumb approach to navigation in PeopleSoft is good. nVision is also a good supplement.

The Work Center feature in PeopleSoft is a step in the right direction in consolidating someone's role-based interaction with the system. This enhanced functionality streamlines workflows and improves efficiency. Additionally, it's worth noting that PeopleSoft's founders later created Workday, a cloud-based human capital management and financial management software vendor. If PeopleSoft could adopt more elements of the intuitive and user-friendly graphical user interface that Workday offers, it would likely enhance the user experience and make PeopleSoft more competitive in the market.

The failure rate is high. Failures can range from minor issues like interface glitches to more significant problems like extreme customization negatively impacting system performance upon upgrades or new feature additions. This observation isn't limited to PeopleSoft; it's a common challenge with other ERP systems like SAP and Oracle. Implementing these systems is complex and requires expertise, unlike simply downloading an app like TikTok

I have been using PeopleSoft since 2002.

The product is stable.

The solution's scalability is one of its strengths. PeopleSoft, like other ERP systems, is designed to handle various business processes and can adapt to the needs of both small and large organizations.

I have worked with Workday, SAP, and Oracle. They all have their merits, and they all have their drawbacks. It comes down to a few factors. First, consider the complexity of your organization, especially if it's multinational. Second, consider the specific features you require. Third, the availability of personnel to maintain the system must be assessed. 

When an upgrade or maintenance is required, having dedicated staff on board can be advantageous in PeopleSoft. It allows for better preparation and change management. Staff can inform stakeholders and manage the implementation at a suitable time. On the other hand, Workday may not require onsite IT staff for upgrades since they're often rolled out seamlessly. This lack of control means changes can occur anytime without sufficient notice to stakeholders.

Choosing between systems like PeopleSoft and others depends on the organization's needs and ability to adapt to changes effectively.

The initial setup of PeopleSoft can vary in difficulty depending on various factors, such as the complexity of the organization's requirements, the expertise of the implementation team, and customization.

The overreliance on using spreadsheets in financial applications. The constraints of uploading spreadsheets to create journal entries can be a headache, but, in the final analysis, it forces the customer to rethink the format of the spreadsheets they use and their reliance on them. PeopleSoft handles much of the heavy lifting.

The twofold aspect would be the ability to segregate positions and the accompanying structure, which is good. Finally, the payroll features allow for separating the North American payroll from the European payroll, with the ability to consolidate them in the final analysis. This includes balance sheets, private loan statements, and income statements.

Before you buy, I will understand the capacity and needs of the company and examine its existing infrastructure. Post-implementation, it's crucial to select SI and ensure change management carefully. Keeping people informed reduces potential issues. Ensure the training staff is compatible with the developers and the change management team. It's like a three-legged stool; they must work together in concert and communicate effectively.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

My company used to use all the modules of PeopleSoft.

In one of my previous organizations, PeopleSoft was used at a global level, during which I felt that the job ID creation and the master data creation were slightly strenuous. Earlier, the analytics elements were there, but I feel that now, a lot of improvements might have been introduced in the tool.

After the transition phase that PeopleSoft went through after its acquisition by Oracle, I think a lot of changes and improvements were introduced in PeopleSoft. A lot of changes in data analytics are required since it was an area of concern when I used to work with the product.

The learning and development side of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required.

I have been using PeopleSoft for a couple of years.

Stability-wise, it is a good tool. If I consider areas, like the learning and development side, the talent management side, succession planning, and such related areas, me and my team used to create custom tools and then integrate them with PeopleSoft as it did not have a few capabilities in the past.

In India, my company had around 6,000 users of the solution.

In India, my company had around 6,000 users of the solution. In one of the other organizations where I had worked previously, there were around 2,000 employees who used to use the solution.

There were many occasions during which I had to contact the technical support of the product. When my team attempted to create job IDs and job rules with the help of PeopleSoft, a few aspects had to be aligned for which support was required. In general, my company used to contact the product's technical support to help train the users of the tool in our organization.

In two of my organizations, I have used PeopleSoft. The first organization where I used PeopleSoft was long ago, and in the other organization, the company moved from PeopleSoft to Oracle HRMS.

The product's initial setup phase was complex and cumbersome, but I managed it ten years ago.

My company used to use PeopleSoft only to deal with HR-related requirements.

Workforce data management, compensation management, payable time, and recruitment modules were a few modules from PeopleSoft that greatly enhanced productivity.

A few years ago, the integration capabilities of the product were slightly complex to use, especially the API integrations, which were not advanced. Owing to the aforementioned reason, my company had to maintain some standalone applications.

Speaking about how the tool's customization or configuration capabilities have benefitted our company's business process, I would say that PeopleSoft helped our organization when we ruled out the talent review process in our large company, where, manually, it would have been a very big task for us. My company had people, applications, and data with which we could form groups and assign projects in a proper way to get things to work out properly for the talent review process to happen.

When doing an evaluation of various products two years ago, I looked at PeopleSoft in detail and saw how much it had advanced. I would say that PeopleSoft is a good product and falls under the category of the top three products that are available in the market. If people already have Oracle products or Oracle applications in their environment, I would strongly recommend PeopleSoft because it is easily compatible with Oracle.

I rate the tool a seven out of ten.