--- description: Review of Gem Software: system overview, features, price and cost information. Get free demos and compare to similar programs on Software Advice New Zealand. image: https://gdm-localsites-assets-gfprod.imgix.net/images/software_advice/og_logo-55146305bbe7b450bea05c18e9be9c9a.png title: Gem | Reviews, Pricing & Demos - SoftwareAdvice NZ --- Breadcrumb: [Home](/) > [Applicant Tracking Systems](/directory/321/applicant-tracking-software/software) > [Gem](/software/102677/gem) # Gem Canonical: https://www.softwareadvice.co.nz/software/102677/gem Page: 1 / 6\ Next: [Next page](https://www.softwareadvice.co.nz/software/102677/gem?page=2) > Gem is the AI-first recruiting platform built for better outcomes, not more tools. Gem combines ATS, CRM, sourcing, scheduling, and pipeline analytics into a connected system, with AI built into every workflow. Recruiters end up spending less time on busywork and more time with candidates. Gem works alongside your existing ATS or as a full replacement, depending on what your team needs. Over 1,200 organizations — including Anthropic, Zillow, Walgreens, Carmax, Robinhood, and Doordash — run their recruiting on Gem. Recruiters using Gem see up to 5x productivity gains, and teams cut recruiting technology costs by 30 to 50 percent by consolidating their stack. > > Verdict: Rated **4.7/5** by 124 users. Top-rated for **Likelihood to recommend**. ----- ## Quick Stats & Ratings | Metric | Rating | Detail | | **Overall** | **4.7/5** | 124 Reviews | | Ease of Use | 4.7/5 | Based on overall reviews | | Customer Support | 4.6/5 | Based on overall reviews | | Value for Money | 4.5/5 | Based on overall reviews | | Features | 4.6/5 | Based on overall reviews | | Recommendation percentage | 90% | (9/10 Likelihood to recommend) | ## About the vendor - **Company**: Gem - **Location**: San Francisco, US - **Founded**: 2017 ## Commercial Context - **Starting Price**: US$135.00 - **Pricing model**: Flat Rate (Free Trial) - **Pricing Details**: For a custom quote, feel free to request a demo. - **Target Audience**: 2–10, 11–50, 51–200, 201–500, 501–1,000, 1,001–5,000, 5,001–10,000, 10,000+ - **Deployment & Platforms**: Cloud, SaaS, Web-based - **Supported Languages**: English - **Available Countries**: Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, United States ## Features - Activity Dashboard - Activity Tracking - Alerts/Notifications - Applicant Tracking - Application Management - Boolean Search - CRM - Campaign Analytics - Campaign Management - Candidate Management - Candidate Profiles - Candidate Sourcing - Candidate Tracking - Collaboration Tools - Communication Management - Customisable Branding - Customisable Reports - Data Import/Export - Demand Forecasting - Email Management ## Integrations (54 total) - AlexisHR - AmazingHiring - Ashby - Avature - Avionté - BambooHR - Behance - Breathe - Breezy - Calendly - Cezanne HR - Checkr - CoderPad - Deel - Dice ... and 39 more integrations ## Support Options - Email/Help Desk - FAQs/Forum - Knowledge Base - Phone Support - Chat ## Category - [Applicant Tracking Systems](https://www.softwareadvice.co.nz/directory/321/applicant-tracking-software/software) ## Related Categories - [Applicant Tracking Systems](https://www.softwareadvice.co.nz/directory/321/applicant-tracking-software/software) - [Predictive Analytics Software](https://www.softwareadvice.co.nz/directory/481/predictive-analytics/software) - [Recruitment Software](https://www.softwareadvice.co.nz/directory/372/recruiting-software/software) - [HR Analytics Software](https://www.softwareadvice.co.nz/directory/3566/hr-analytics/software) - [Human Capital Management Software](https://www.softwareadvice.co.nz/directory/1867/hcm/software) ## Alternatives 1. [BambooHR](https://www.softwareadvice.co.nz/software/27196/bamboohr-payroll) — 4.6/5 (3546 reviews) 2. [micro1](https://www.softwareadvice.co.nz/software/529654/micro1) — 4.9/5 (823 reviews) 3. [100Hires](https://www.softwareadvice.co.nz/software/111306/100hires) — 4.9/5 (1187 reviews) 4. [Paylocity](https://www.softwareadvice.co.nz/software/4537/web-pay) — 4.3/5 (1927 reviews) 5. [Paycom](https://www.softwareadvice.co.nz/software/32588/paycom) — 4.4/5 (1386 reviews) ## Reviews ### "A great tool, a lot of potential to be a real gem" — 4.0/5 > **Mathieu** | *3 February 2025* | Information Technology & Services | Recommendation rating: 7.0/10 > > **Pros**: I particularly like the collaboration possibilities in GEM. I'm heavily relying on shared projects with my teammates and finding a good workflow is easy with GEM. > > **Cons**: I wish GEM (1) could improve the filtering options in projects because filtering isn't the smoothest experience I've had so far and the tool has the potential for more and (2) could give us more freedom in building our own dashboards. There are many widgets available (which is great) but it makes it hard to quickly build the dashboards we want - we have to play around with the tool before, in order to find the best variables. > > The tool can definitely be improved to improve the sourcer/recruiter experience but I'm glad GEM is part of our sourcing workflow\! ----- ### "Great Recruiting & Sourcing Tool\!" — 4.0/5 > **Ryan** | *10 August 2022* | Financial Services | Recommendation rating: 8.0/10 > > **Pros**: I like that Gem has a strong database of email addresses that they verify, their reporting and analytics is very useful for identifying bottlenecks in the recruiting \& sourcing process, reviewing top of funnel metrics for the team, and measuring template effectiveness when reaching out to candidates. > > **Cons**: I believe the user interface is a bit clunky and could honestly use a design make-over. > > Overall, Gem is a great tool for any company's recruiting stack. It's got a ton of features, great integrations, and they're backed by top tier VCs\! ----- ### "OK CRM Recruiting Tech Undermined by a Weak Post-Sale Service Model" — 2.0/5 > **Anthony** | *24 July 2026* | Airlines/Aviation | Recommendation rating: 2.0/10 > > **Pros**: I have worked with numerous applicant tracking, recruiting CRM, sourcing, and AI-enabled talent platforms, and currently oversee an HR technology environment involving more than 175 systems and applications across our organization. Against that reference set, Gem remains a capable recruiting technology product. Its core strengths are sourcing, candidate pipeline development, sequencing, and the consolidation of recruiting activity into a relatively intuitive interface. The learning curve is reasonable for experienced recruiting professionals, and the platform can materially improve recruiter efficiency when configured and supported properly. Importantly, our experience with Gem was not always negative. We previously had a Customer Success partner who was highly accessible, knowledgeable, and willing to spend the time necessary to understand our recruiting environment. That experience demonstrated that Gem can pair a strong product with strong service. The contrast with our current experience is therefore particularly notable. > > **Cons**: Among the HR technology vendors I have worked with, our recent service experience with Gem has been among the poorest. The issue is not a single delayed email or an isolated interaction. It is the cumulative pattern: limited ownership, repeated handoffs, reliance on generic support channels and prerecorded material, constrained access to live expertise, and a noticeable difference between the attentiveness surrounding renewal and the support available afterward. We first documented concerns about unanswered support requests on June 12. By July 2, I had explicitly identified responsiveness, ownership, implementation support, and follow-through as the problem. Subsequent escalation led to a Customer Success conversation, but that session itself was shorter than necessary and did not resolve the outstanding issues. The next step was to review several on-demand webinars before another targeted session could be scheduled. The most revealing interaction came later. After explaining that 30 minutes had repeatedly been insufficient, I asked whether 45–60 minutes could be accommodated, noting that our previous Customer Success partner routinely reserved 45 minutes and often remained longer when the work required it. The response acknowledged the need but stated that, “due to bandwidth constraints,” calls had to remain limited to 30 minutes and instructed us to “Please come prepared.” That exchange captures the broader problem. We were not asking Gem to compensate for a lack of preparation. We were asking for sufficient access to expertise to properly use a platform for which we are already paying. “Bandwidth constraints” may be an understandable internal operating reality. From the customer's perspective, however, vendor capacity should not become the mechanism by which adequate support is rationed—particularly after the customer has already escalated concerns about inadequate support. > > Gem is a case study in why enterprise software should be evaluated as both technology and service infrastructure. I approach this review from a fairly broad comparative base. I have worked with multiple ATS, sourcing, recruiting, HRIS, payroll, benefits, performance, analytics, and AI-enabled platforms, and currently have responsibility across an organizational technology ecosystem containing more than 175 systems and applications. I therefore do not expect every SaaS vendor to provide unlimited consulting or immediate access to a dedicated representative. Tiered support models and capacity constraints are normal. What is not normal, in my experience, is the degree of effort required here to obtain substantive assistance after concerns have already been escalated. The chronology matters. We raised support concerns in June after reaching out multiple times without receiving the expected follow-through. After renewal, when we attempted to address implementation and adoption concerns, we were directed toward a generic support channel. We escalated again. A Customer Success leader became involved. After a live session that did not provide enough time to address the issues, the follow-up consisted largely of on-demand webinars, followed by another narrowly scoped session. When I explicitly explained that the allotted time had repeatedly proven inadequate and requested 45–60 minutes, the request was declined because of Gem's “bandwidth constraints.” There is also a subtle but important customer-experience issue in the language throughout these interactions. The communications are courteous. The problem is not tone in the conventional sense. It is where responsibility is repeatedly placed. The customer is asked to review additional materials, narrow the discussion, prepare specific questions, and make the interaction more efficient because the vendor cannot allocate additional time. Individually, each request is reasonable. Collectively, after repeated escalation regarding inadequate support, they reveal a service model oriented toward managing vendor capacity rather than resolving the customer's underlying problem. That distinction matters. A sophisticated software product inevitably creates questions that cannot always be resolved through webinars or documentation. Customer Success should add diagnostic value: understanding the customer's environment, identifying configuration or adoption gaps, translating product capability into workflow, and staying engaged long enough to determine whether the problem has actually been solved. Our previous experience with Gem demonstrated exactly that kind of partnership, which is why I do not view the current experience as an inherent limitation of the product. It appears to be a deterioration in the service model surrounding it. For prospective buyers, my recommendation is therefore qualified rather than categorical: evaluate Gem on the strength of the technology, but conduct equal diligence on the post-sale service model. Before signing, establish exactly who will own your account after implementation; whether you have a named Customer Success resource; what live advisory support is actually included; typical meeting duration and availability; escalation procedures; and what happens when self-service materials do not resolve an issue. If those elements matter to your implementation or operating model, obtain the expectations in writing. Gem remains a capable platform. But software value is not merely a function of features. It is the combination of functionality, adoption, implementation quality, access to expertise, and the vendor's willingness to assume ownership when something is not working. On the technology itself, Gem remains competitive. On Customer Success, based on our recent experience, I would exercise considerable caution. ----- ### "I love Gem\!" — 5.0/5 > **Ryan** | *13 April 2023* | Computer Software | Recommendation rating: 9.0/10 > > **Pros**: Having reminders for InMails and getting emails sent automatically through gem is a GAME CHANGER. I am not the most organized person, so in the past I would have candidates fall through the cracks if I missed messaging them for 2nd, 3rd, 4th touch points. Now I get reminders or have it done automatically. > > **Cons**: I cannot think of any cons of using Gem so far. I use it daily for candidate messaging and management, I have enjoyed it a ton. > > Gem has definitely made me a better recruiter and made my job easier. ----- ### "GEM has evolved and is getting better" — 5.0/5 > **Verified Reviewer** | *9 August 2023* | Computer Software | Recommendation rating: 8.0/10 > > **Pros**: It's way to manage new outbound candidates/prospects that you sourced to fit your openings. > > **Cons**: It's getting to the point of asking..what else can GEM Do? Beyond managing / CRM / outbound.... > > its an ok product now, it used to be a game changer but it's not innovating enough ----- Page: 1 / 6\ Next: [Next page](https://www.softwareadvice.co.nz/software/102677/gem?page=2) ## Links - [View on SoftwareAdvice](https://www.softwareadvice.co.nz/software/102677/gem) ## This page is available in the following languages | Locale | URL | | de | | | en | | | en-AU | | | en-GB | | | en-IE | | | en-NZ | | | fr | | ----- ## Structured Data