Three Sales Calls, One Published Price, and One Flat Rate From Cascadia

You compare what you can and you are honest about the rest. Workable publishes, at two hundred and ninety nine dollars a month on Standard, five hundred and ninety nine on Premier and seven hundred and nineteen on Enterprise, all quoted at one to twenty employees. Greenhouse, Lever and iCIMS all quote instead. So the comparison you can run before the calls is about what each one includes rather than what it charges, and there the gaps are real: Greenhouse puts texting and automation on its middle tier, Lever sells onboarding and candidate insights as separate modules, and iCIMS sells the tracker, the sourcing CRM and the career site as three products. Take your headcount and your expected hires into all three calls and ask each of them to price the same thing.

Rarely on the software. It goes wrong on the stages and on the handover, and nobody quotes for either. Somebody capable configures something genuinely useful in two weeks, hiring managers start relying on it, and then that person changes role and nobody left can safely add a requisition type. Meanwhile a pipeline that fitted the first six months does not fit the year you open a second office, and the fixes get bolted on sideways. Ask who maintains it before you ask what it costs.

You do, and it is not a clause we negotiated for you. The Zoho account is in your name and billed to you, we do not resell the licenses, and every candidate record, note, scorecard and offer stays inside it. Stop paying us and nothing switches off. That matters more here than with most software, because candidate data carries retention obligations you cannot discharge from somebody else’s account, and the day a subject access request arrives is not the day to work out whose login it sat under.

For a lot of businesses, yes, and we would rather say so here than after an invoice. If you hire a handful of people a year and somebody in the office is happy to run the pipeline, Workable Standard at two hundred and ninety nine dollars a month does that job and seven hundred does not need spending. Where the arithmetic turns is volume and enforcement: enough openings that screening becomes somebody’s second job, enough hiring managers that the process has to be enforced rather than suggested, and enough integration that a signed offer has to reach payroll and IT without anybody retyping it. What no platform price includes is that somebody.

Workable, on the only evidence any of them publishes, and that is a narrower claim than it sounds. Two hundred and ninety nine dollars a month at one to twenty employees is the lowest number on this page, and it climbs through nine employee bands from there, with eighty nine more for texting, one hundred and nine for video interviews and fifty nine for assessments if you want them on Standard. Greenhouse, Lever and iCIMS publish nothing, so anybody who ranks those three for you is guessing. Our figure is seven hundred dollars a month, it is on this page, and the difference is that it includes a person.

On a subscription the platform is supported and whatever you configured on it is not, and almost everything that goes wrong is the thing you configured. A candidate stuck in a stage because of the way an automation was scoped is not a bug their support desk can fix, because somebody scoped it. Here it is one company and one number, fixes sit inside the fee rather than being quoted for, and when Zoho ships a platform change that breaks a workflow you depend on, that is our problem before it is yours.

No, and most should not. The usual order is the role you hire most often, because that is where the time comes back soonest and where you find out quickly whether the stages suit how you actually decide. The rest follows once that one is running. A senior search that runs on three conversations and a shared document can stay that way, and there is rarely a reason to rush it. Moving everything in one quarter is how a business ends up running two half finished processes and trusting neither.

Often, and it is real work rather than a tidy up. We read the pipelines and their stages, the screening and scoring rules, the automations and templates, the permission sets, the job board connections and the reports nobody has opened in a year, then say plainly what is worth keeping and what should be rebuilt. Inherited trackers tend to be sound in the parts somebody tested and quietly wrong in the parts nobody did, and working out which is which is most of the first month.

Four to ten weeks for most businesses, and longer where several managers do not currently agree on how a decision actually gets made. The candidate structure comes first, then the pipelines and permissions, then the career site and job board publishing, then the screening, the offers and the reporting. Configuration starts the week we begin rather than after a discovery phase that bills separately. What people notice first is rarely the software. It is that nobody is asking which spreadsheet holds the current shortlist.

Quite possibly nothing, and that is a fine answer. A recruiter who owns the process and actually keeps it current is most of this. Where we tend to be useful alongside one is the parts that are not their job at all: the pipeline structure that is expensive to change later, the Deluge scripting, the permission design, the retention rules, the integration into the rest of Zoho so a hire reaches your books and your CRM, and noticing the week a job board feed stops. Plenty of clients keep the recruiter and hire us for the engineering around them.

Two cases, and both are common. If you hire twice a year and both times through somebody you already know, buy a cheap plan or nothing at all, because there is no process here worth managing. And if what you actually need is the whole employee record rather than the hiring end of it, meaning payroll, leave, reviews and everything after day one, then stretching a recruiting tool to cover it is an expensive way to arrive somewhere a proper HR platform already is.

We will say so before taking your money, and the fit review costs nothing. Hiring that feels chaotic is usually chaotic because two managers disagree about who makes the final call, not because the tracker is slow. A fair number of these conversations end with one agreed process, one person accountable for the decision, and no new software at all.

One flat monthly rate of seven hundred dollars, listed on the managed Zoho Recruit page and on this one. It covers the candidate database, the pipelines and their stages, the career site and job board publishing, the screening and assessment steps, the offers and their approvals, the role based permissions, and integration with the rest of your Zoho environment. Your Zoho licenses sit outside that and are billed to you by Zoho, because we do not resell them. Nothing in our figure moves when you open more roles or hire more people.

Thirty days’ notice ends it and nothing is stranded. The Zoho account, the configuration and every candidate record in it were always yours and always billed to you, so there is no migration and nothing to hand back. What stops is us. The pipelines keep running, the automations keep firing and the career site keeps taking applications. What you give up is the person who would have noticed the week one of them stopped.

Whatever you are hiring out of now, in whatever state it is in, read access to wherever the candidate records live, a copy of the last few job descriptions and offer letters, and an hour with whoever actually runs an interview loop rather than whoever owns hiring on the org chart. The walk through takes a few days and costs nothing, and it ends with a plain answer about whether Zoho Recruit suits the job or whether you want something else entirely.