Build vs Buy · 8 min read

Why Companies Are Moving Away from SaaS Hiring Tools

More and more companies are trading their SaaS hiring tools for custom systems. This article explains why, with concrete numbers and examples.

Door Ingmar van Maurik · Founder & CEO, Making Moves

The SaaS hiring market is growing, but so is dissatisfaction

The market for SaaS hiring tools is enormous. There are over 400 Applicant Tracking Systems available, from Greenhouse and Lever to Workable and Personio. Every year new ones appear, each promising a better and faster recruitment process.

Yet we are seeing a striking trend: more and more companies are moving away from these tools. Not because they are bad, but because they no longer fit the ambition and complexity of organizations that view hiring as a strategic pillar.

In this article we explore the reasons behind this shift, supported by data and real-world examples. We also look at what companies are building instead and why it pays off in the long run.

The five main reasons for switching

1. Costs escalate faster than expected

Most SaaS tools start affordably. A standard package might cost 300 to 500 euros per month. But as you grow, costs explode:

  • Per-seat pricing means every new recruiter or hiring manager increases the bill
  • Add-on modules for assessments, analytics, or integrations cost extra
  • Premium support is almost always a paid upgrade
  • API access for custom integrations is often locked behind the most expensive tiers

    • A mid-sized company with 5 recruiters and 200 hires per year easily spends 15,000 to 40,000 euros per year on SaaS licenses, not counting the time needed to configure and maintain the tool.

    As we described in our article about the true cost of ATS software, total ownership costs average 40 to 60 percent higher than the advertised price.

    2. Customization is limited to cosmetic changes

    Most SaaS tools offer customization, but only at a surface level. You can change the logo, adjust email templates, and rename pipeline stages. But try to:

  • Implement a custom scoring model that fits your company culture
  • Build a multi-stage assessment flow that differs by department
  • Add automated decision logic that goes beyond simple filters
  • Train a custom AI model on your historical hiring data

    • It simply does not work. You adapt your process to the tool, not the other way around. For companies that view hiring as a competitive advantage, that is unacceptable.

    3. Data is locked inside the vendor

    This may be the most underestimated problem. All your candidate data, assessment results, interview scores, and hiring analytics sit with a third party. That means:

  • You cannot train your own predictive models on your data
  • When switching to another tool, you lose years of accumulated insights
  • You depend on the reporting capabilities the vendor provides
  • Your hiring data is not an asset of your company, but of the vendor

    • In our article about data ownership in hiring, we explain why this is a strategic risk that many companies recognize too late.

    4. Integrations work poorly at best

    The average HR stack of a growing company consists of 6 to 12 tools: an ATS, assessment platform, onboarding tool, HRIS, payroll system, and various communication tools. The promise of SaaS is that everything integrates seamlessly via API connections.

    The reality is different:

    ProblemImpact

    |---------|--------|

    Data sync delaysCandidate info is not available in real time across all systems Incomplete data mappingNot all fields match between systems Breaking changes on updatesIntegrations break without warning after vendor updates Double data entryRecruiters enter the same info in multiple systems Limited API rate limitsHigh volumes hit rate limits

    The result is a fragmented candidate experience and an inefficient internal process. Recruiters spend more time navigating between tools than actually talking to candidates.

    5. AI claims vs. AI reality

    Virtually every SaaS hiring tool now claims to use AI. But what they call AI is often nothing more than:

  • Keyword matching in CVs, not real semantic analysis
  • Simple ranking based on hardcoded criteria
  • Template-based messages sold as personalized
  • Basic automation that is more workflow automation than AI

    • Real AI in hiring means predictive models that learn from your successful hires, real-time bias detection, and continuous calibration of your assessment criteria. That requires access to your data and the freedom to build models specific to your context.

    What companies are doing instead

    Companies moving away from SaaS hiring tools are increasingly choosing their own system. Not a system they build entirely from scratch, but a custom platform designed specifically for their needs.

    The advantages of your own system

    Full control over the candidate experience. From the first interaction on the job page to the assessment and the offer, everything feels like one logical flow. No separate tools, no broken redirects, no inconsistent branding.

    Data as a strategic asset. All hiring data is yours. You can train models, recognize patterns, and continuously improve your process based on your own results. The more you hire, the smarter your system becomes.

    Costs that decrease instead of increase. After the initial investment, ongoing costs are minimal. No per-seat licenses, no add-on costs, no vendor lock-in. For a company with 200 hires per year, the typical payback period is 12 to 18 months.

    Integration on your terms. You build connections that work for your stack, not the connections a vendor happens to offer. Real-time sync, custom data mapping, and full control over the data flow.

    The reality of switching

    The switch is not without challenges. Your own system requires:

  • A clear vision of what your hiring process should look like
  • Initial budget that is higher than a year of SaaS licenses
  • Patience for the implementation phase of typically 2 to 4 months
  • A partner who understands both the technical and the HR side

    • But for companies serious about hiring as a competitive advantage, it is an investment that more than pays for itself. As we describe in our article about build vs. buy decisions, the question is not whether to build your own system, but when.

    Real-world example: from 4 tools to 1 system

    A Dutch tech company with 300 employees used four separate tools for their hiring: an ATS, an assessment platform, a scheduling tool, and an analytics dashboard. The total monthly cost was over 4,800 euros, not counting the time the HR team spent managing the integrations.

    After switching to their own system:

  • Costs dropped by 60 percent on an annual basis after the initial investment
  • Time-to-hire dropped from 38 to 22 days thanks to a streamlined flow
  • Candidate satisfaction increased by 35 percent due to a seamless experience
  • Quality-of-hire improved measurably because assessments were integrated into the process

    • The future of hiring technology

    The trend is clear: companies that view hiring as a strategic function are moving away from generic SaaS tools toward solutions specific to their context. This is not anti-SaaS sentiment; it is a recognition that your recruitment process is too important to leave to a one-size-fits-all tool.

    In the coming years we expect this trend to accelerate, driven by:

  • AI becoming increasingly accessible, making custom model training more realistic
  • Rising SaaS costs due to market consolidation
  • Increasing regulation around AI in hiring that requires custom compliance
  • Growing awareness that hiring data is a strategic business asset

    • Key takeaways

  • SaaS hiring tools are a good starting point but grow in cost without growing in value
  • The five main reasons for switching are cost, limited customization, data lock-in, poor integrations, and superficial AI
  • A custom system offers full control, better data, and lower long-term costs
  • The switch requires an initial investment but typically pays for itself within 12 to 18 months
  • The trend toward custom hiring systems is accelerating due to more accessible AI and rising SaaS costs

    • Want to find out if a custom hiring system fits your organization? Schedule a free consultation or explore our AI hiring system solution.

    Book an intake call · View our AI Hiring System