Introduction

Choosing the right Human Resource Information System (HRIS) is pivotal for any organization looking to streamline HR operations and optimize workforce management. This comparison will delve into two leading HRIS tools: Paylocity and Lano.

​

Paylocity delivers a comprehensive product suite that enables HR professionals to make strategic decisions in benefits, core HR, payroll, talent, and workforce management, fostering a modern workplace and enhancing employee engagement.

On the other hand, Lano is a cloud-based compliance and payments platform providing a unified solution for hiring, managing, and paying employees and contractors in full compliance in over 150 countries worldwide, negating the need to establish legal entities.

Given the myriad of functionalities these HRIS tools offer, comparing them will help identify which best suits different organizational needs.

​

Paylocity Overview

​

Paylocity is designed to address various aspects of human resource management through a unified platform. It excels in integrating benefits management, payroll, talent acquisition and management, and workforce management into a single, cohesive solution.

​

Key Features

​

• Core HR: Paylocity centralizes employee data, simplifying HR operations from onboarding to offboarding.
• Payroll Management: Automated payroll processing reduces errors and ensures timely payments.
• Benefits Administration: Seamless integration with benefits providers to manage enrollment and track benefits usage.
• Talent Management: Tools for recruiting, performance management, and learning and development.
• Workforce Management: Scheduling, time tracking, and attendance tools to optimize workforce planning.
• Employee Engagement: Surveys, peer recognition programs, and tools to foster a collaborative work environment.
• Analytics and Reporting: Advanced analytics for informed decision-making and customized reporting capabilities.

​

Lano Overview

​

Lano focuses on simplifying global hiring and compliance through its cloud-based platform. It stands out due to its ability to manage and pay a remote and diverse workforce legally compliant in over 150 countries.

​

Key Features

​

• Global Hiring: Tools to hire full-time employees and contractors worldwide without needing local entities.
• Compliance: Ensures adherence to local labor laws, tax regulations, and contractor agreements.
• Payments Processing: Facilitates multi-currency payments and manages payroll for international teams.
• Document Management: Secure and accessible storage for contracts, compliance documents, and onboarding materials.
• Project Management: Coordination tools to oversee projects involving international teams.
• Time Tracking: Monitoring working hours and managing timesheets for global contractors.
• Expense Management: Streamlines the process of tracking and reimbursing expenses in various currencies.

​

Similarities

​

While Paylocity and Lano cater to different primary functions within the HRIS sphere, they share several similarities:

​

• Unified Platforms: Both offer a centralized platform combining multiple HR functionalities.
• Compliance Assurance: Each ensures that HR processes comply with relevant legal and regulatory requirements.
• Employee Management: Both facilitate comprehensive management of employees and contractors.
• Automation: Automation capabilities to streamline various HR tasks, reducing manual effort and errors.
• Analytics & Reporting: Tools for analytics and reporting to support strategic decision-making.

​

Differences

The core differences between Paylocity and Lano lie in their primary focus areas and specific features:

• Primary Function: Paylocity's strength lies in its comprehensive HR and payroll management suited for domestic markets, whereas Lano excels in managing a global workforce and ensuring international compliance.
• Geographical Focus: Paylocity is primarily tailored for US-based companies, while Lano is designed to support global operations across 150 countries.
• Payroll Processing: Paylocity focuses on automated payroll and taxes for primarily US employees; Lano handles multi-currency payments for international contractors.
• Talent Management: Paylocity provides robust talent acquisition and performance management tools, while Lano concentrates on managing and paying international employees and contractors.
• Employee Engagement: Paylocity includes tools for employee engagement and development, which Lano lacks given its focus is primarily on compliance and payments.
• Entity Setup: Lano negates the need for setting up local legal entities for hiring globally, a feature not addressed by Paylocity.

​

Pros and Cons

Paylocity

​

Pros:

• Comprehensive suite covering all aspects of HR management.
• Strong payroll and tax management features.
• Advanced talent management capabilities.
• Effective employee engagement tools.
• Extensive analytics and reporting functionalities.

​

Cons:

• Primarily suited for US-based companies.
• Complexity might be overwhelming for small businesses.
• Higher cost for the extensive feature set.

Lano

​

Pros:

• Specializes in global compliance and payments.
• Simplifies hiring and managing international contractors and employees.
• Handles multi-currency payroll processing efficiently.
• Enables legal hiring without establishing local entities.
• Streamlined document and project management for global operations.

​

Cons:

• Lacks in-depth talent management tools.
• Employee engagement features are minimal.
• More beneficial for companies with a significant international presence.
• May require integration with other HRIS tools for domestic HR processes.

​

Use Cases

​

Paylocity

​

Paylocity is an ideal choice for:

• Medium to large businesses in the US needing a comprehensive HR and payroll solution.
• Organizations seeking to enhance employee engagement and talent management.
• Companies requiring robust reporting and analytics to inform HR strategies.
• Businesses looking for a unified platform to streamline all HR operations.

​

Lano

​

Lano is best suited for:

• Companies with a global presence needing to hire and manage international employees and contractors.
• Businesses looking to simplify compliance with diverse local labor laws and tax regulations.
• Organizations requiring efficient multi-currency payroll processing.
• Companies wanting to avoid the complexity and cost of setting up local legal entities.

​

Conclusion

​

When comparing Paylocity and Lano, it's clear that each has unique strengths tailored to different organizational needs. Paylocity excels in delivering a comprehensive HR and payroll solution for US-based companies, with a strong focus on employee engagement and talent management. On the other hand, Lano stands out for its global compliance and payments capabilities, making it an excellent choice for companies operating internationally.

​

Ultimately, the choice between Paylocity and Lano depends on the specific requirements of your organization. If you need a powerful, all-encompassing HR solution focused on the US market, Paylocity is the better option. However, if your organization operates globally and needs to manage international hiring and compliance efficiently, Lano would be the more appropriate choice.