Ezekia ATS vs Spott

In recruitment, speed is crucial. Ezekia’s system, with page load times averaging around one second, might seem acceptable at first glance. However, compared to platforms offering near-instantaneous responsiveness (around 0.1 seconds), this delay becomes significant.

Over a busy day, these extra seconds can accumulate into minutes, disrupting the fluid multitasking recruiters rely on. For instance, switching between candidate profiles and dashboards, even a one-second delay can feel like an eternity, especially when time is synonymous with opportunity.

When managing your pipeline for instance, a lot of data is cramped together, with notes/comments on candidates added in-line, and dozens of custom labels everywhere. This makes it hard to maintain a clear overview of what is actually going on.

A good Chrome extension is a recruiter’s best friend, offering quick access to candidate data. Ezekia’s extension suffers from latency and reliability issues, which can hinder outreach campaigns. When every second counts, a slow extension can be frustrating.

Spott likely offers a more robust and responsive extension, ensuring instantaneous, reliable data syncing. This means recruiters can focus on building relationships without technical glitches, staying ahead in talent acquisition.

Integrating contact data is essential for candidate profiles. Ezekia’s approach often requires extra configuration steps, disrupting workflow and introducing inefficiency. This can be counterproductive when swift engagement is key.

Spott, with its all-in-one platform, probably provides a seamless integration, embedding data into profiles with real-time updates. Spott eliminates the need for manual validation or external synchronization. This ensures data consistency and lets recruiters access all necessary details without hassle, focusing on building relationships rather than managing data.

During interviews, focus is crucial. Ezekia’s basic transcription support often requires manual notes or third-party tools, detracting from efficiency and accuracy, potentially losing valuable insights. Ezekia offers none of these tools out of the box, but has since a short amount of time promised to make work of integrating with Metaview, a popular note taker for recruiters. However, this quickly comes at an additional ~$40 per recruiter per month.

Spott addresses this with advanced AI-driven note-taking, automatically generating detailed notes. This allows recruiters to stay engaged, reducing burden and enhancing decision-making with a richer data repository. We have developed our own in-house noter that joins your meeting lobby's automatically (without further action required from you). If allowed into the meeting, you will receive detailed notes directly into Spott after your call has ended, linked to clients or candidates that were in the call.

Finding candidates quickly is vital. Ezekia’s search is limited to basic keywords, missing insights from unstructured data like emails and resumes, often yielding incomplete results. Ezekia lacks a natural language query interface, forcing manual configuration of basic analytics, which is time-consuming and frustrating.

Spott relies on true vector search instead; this means we have a real understanding of how 'close' keywords such as Python and TensorFlow, or Clinical Researcher and Clinical Scientist are to each other, without relying on a set of aliases to define this. This means you can simply search for "senior AI/ML engineers with Python, TensorFlow or similar skills " without running the risk of missing a gold medalist in your ATS because of a missing alias.

In conclusion, while Ezekia provides a solid foundation, it lags behind Spott in speed, integration, AI capabilities, and user experience. Spott’s advanced features streamline processes, enhance productivity, and lead to better candidate placements. As recruitment evolves, investing in Spott can give your firm the edge needed to succeed.