It is very user-friendly. The interface is intuitive and easy on the eyes, with a clean and organized layout. Even hiring managers can navigate it with minimal guidance.

Another benefit is that the ATS is fluid and customizable, seamlessly reflecting the hiring process. You can easily update candidate information, upload documents, and edit candidate names without issues.

Lever also integrates very well with LinkedIn, minimizing redundancy in sourcing efforts. This is one of my top preferred systems.

I have only worked with this client for a year. I believe they have used this system for at least four years as their main ATS and candidate database. The organization likely chose this tool to manage a large volume of applicants efficiently.

It provides a centralized platform for tracking applicants, managing workflows, and ensuring timely communication. From what I’ve seen, the system supports the end-to-end recruitment process effectively.

Once the system and workflows are set up, changes can be difficult. For example, this client forgot to include a status for when HR sends candidates for review, such as "HM Review," so we currently use alternatives like "Intro Session" or "Phone Interview," depending on the team.

Data is not readily available for export and analysis; while there are functions, the landing page only shows status updates on recent or newly opened roles.

Integration with Outlook is not seamless. I’ve seen other ATS platforms with smoother email integration that allow full email functionality within the system—Lever, or at least this client’s version, does not.

The interface and integrations stand out. This tool is easier to learn quickly compared to others I’ve used. Lever effectively supports the recruitment process by helping to manage candidates, track progress, and apply appropriate tagging.

The LinkedIn integration is among the best I’ve encountered. I also like how candidates are directed to apply through the client’s website in a clear and straightforward way.

I think Lever is quite expensive, but the value is there—especially if your organization heavily uses LinkedIn. It’s critical to establish a solid process when setting up workflows to reflect the actual hiring process. Doing this properly helps hiring managers participate more actively in screening and feedback. Planning the workflow in advance can prevent limitations later.

I haven’t worked with this client long, and so far, the Lever functions I started with have remained the same a year later.

A large organization (1,000+ employees) with active hiring manager involvement and one that uses LinkedIn as a primary sourcing platform will benefit greatly from Lever.

• Ease of Startup: We implemented the essential features quickly and can scale as we grow.
• Integrations: It integrates with LinkedIn Recruiter, Indeed, and Hubspot—three essential tools in our workflow.
• Structured Interview Process: With a geographically dispersed and largely remote workforce, this feature ensures consistent interview quality and helps capture cultural considerations, supporting fairness and preparedness.

The company was bringing all People functions in-house and needed a tool for talent acquisition. The basic requirements were to post jobs, build a candidate pool, and generate offers. Lever provided this functionality without high costs or a lengthy implementation timeline.

We were also attracted to its additional integrations and reporting features, which could scale as the company’s needs evolved. Many of our other software tools offer integration support with Lever.

• Customization: While customization is possible, the associated services significantly increase costs, which is not ideal for smaller, budget-constrained companies.
• API Fee Cost: Integration costs are high compared to other providers.
• Onboarding: The onboarding workflow features are limited, requiring us to supplement with manual processes. We hope this will be resolved in the future.

Lever includes the core features common to many applicant tracking systems—job postings, candidate applications, and interview management. It stands out for its resume parsing, email templates, and DEI capabilities. It falls short in onboarding features and affordability compared to some other tools.

The top three criteria to consider when evaluating Lever are:

• Candidate management—what data you need to collect and the expected volume.
• Integration—what other tools you want to connect with this platform.
• Scalability—how affordable and complex it will be to expand the tool’s features as your organization grows.

We began using Lever in 2020 and have not seen major new product enhancements since then. However, the quality and stability of existing features have improved.

Lever is suitable for organizations of any size.

Lever has strong functionality for posting jobs. Its candidate tracking and communication features are excellent when used properly. It includes role-based data access control, which is very helpful for larger teams.

My client was already using Lever when I was contracted to help improve some of their HR processes and review compliance. The company operates nationwide with six regions, over 30 satellite offices, and thousands of employees. The goal was to standardize tools across all regions. Many, but not all, were using Lever for recruiting. I worked with the tool as part of my engagement to assess its implementation and effectiveness.

I found the reporting to be limited, though I am unsure whether this was due to Lever or the client’s setup. The interface can be difficult to navigate and could be more user-friendly. It lacked integration with the existing HRIS, resulting in additional manual work for recruiters.

Lever is better than some platforms but not as strong as others. The pricing is excellent for the level of functionality it provides.

Anyone considering Lever should ask whether it integrates with your HRIS, background check providers, and onboarding tools. It is also important to check if it integrates with your calendar and email systems. Finally, confirm that the cost aligns with your budget and overall recruitment needs.

I believe it has, but I’m not sure.

Lever is suitable for businesses with multiple hiring managers and multiple interviews per hire. It works best for higher recruiting volumes, but may not be ideal for large enterprises. It is especially useful for small recruiting teams that need support managing candidates.