Kevin
Previously a Strong ATS, but Recent Changes Have Eroded Our Trust
When we initially selected Workable, it was a user-friendly ATS that was simple to implement and helped streamline our recruiting processes. At that time, I would have confidently recommended it to other Talent Acquisition leaders. Unfortunately, our experience has changed significantly. Workable discontinued automated AI resume-parsing functionality that had been represented as included when we selected the platform. The replacement process is considerably more manual and requires our team to establish must-have and preferred criteria for each individual position. For an organization managing more than 100 active requisitions and continuing to scale, this process is neither efficient nor sustainable. We were then presented with an additional cost of approximately $20,000 annually to regain functionality comparable to what was previously included. This defeats a primary reason companies invest in an applicant tracking system: to reduce administrative work, improve efficiency, and create a scalable recruitment process. Our concern extends beyond the additional cost. It is about transparency, trust, and the expectations established when the product was sold to us. Workable was once a platform I would readily recommend, but these changes have significantly damaged its credibility with our organization. Based on our current experience, I would encourage prospective customers to carefully confirm which features are included, whether those features can be removed or changed, and what additional costs may be introduced over the course of the agreement.