Ezekia ATS vs Spott

In recruitment, speed matters. Ezekia’s system average page load times of around 1 second might initially feel acceptable. However, compared to platforms offering near-instantaneous responsiveness (around 0.1 seconds), this delay becomes significant.

Over a busy day, these brief delays quickly accumulate, disrupting recruiters' workflow. Even a one-second lag when switching between profiles and dashboards can distract users, causing them to delay or overlook important updates and tasks.

Additionally, when managing candidate pipelines, interfaces packed with notes, comments, and numerous custom labels can feel cluttered, making it difficult to maintain a clear overview.

A fast, reliable LinkedIn Chrome extension is crucial for professional recruiters. Ezekia's extension suffers from latency and reliability issues, delaying access to critical candidate data. In recruitment, where every second counts, a slow extension creates unnecessary frustration.

Spott offers a reliable extension with instant data syncing, letting recruiters focus on sourcing without technical disruptions.

Next, Spott sources candidates differently - without complex Boolean searches. Unlike Ezekia's cumbersome queries, Spott semantically understands your entire database, effortlessly recognizing related terms and suggesting the best matches.

Integrating contact data is essential for personalized outreach. Ezekia overcomplicates this, adding extra setup steps that slow workflows and offers no data quality checks. Since Ezekia primarily serves executive search users who rarely utilize outreach campaigns, this feature remains overlooked and unintuitive.

Spott’s all-in-one platform integrates data directly into profiles with real-time updates, eliminating manual checks and external syncing. Recruiters effortlessly access accurate data through via a workflow that is easy to set up.

Focus during interviews is key; you want to concentrate on the candidate or client, not on taking notes. This leads to richer conversations and helps uncover deeper insights during the call. Ezekia offers no built-in transcription, forcing recruiters to take manual notes or rely on third-party tools, which hurts efficiency and risks missing important insights. Ezekia integrates with popular AI note takers such as Metaview, HireLogic and Quil, but this adds an extra cost of around $50 per recruiter per month.

Spott solves this with a built-in AI note-taker that automatically generates detailed notes. It joins your meeting lobby with no extra steps and, once admitted, links the notes directly to the relevant clients or candidates in Spott. Additionally, Spott uses AI agents to automatically update specific fields (e.g. salary expectations) in your database, based on the notes.

Finding candidates quickly is essential. Ezekia’s search is limited to basic keywords, missing insights from unstructured data sources like emails, notes and resumes, often leading to incomplete search results.

Spott uses true vector search, meaning it understands how closely related terms like Python and TensorFlow or Clinical Researcher and Clinical Scientist are - without needing a list of predefined keywords. So you can type something like "senior AI/ML engineers with Python, TensorFlow or similar skills" without worrying about excluding great candidates due to missing terms.

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 grow.