Aragorn vs Visier
Both of us answer questions about your people, and the difference is where the answer comes from. Visier reads a governed model of your people data. So do we. This page is about who builds that model, and who keeps it right when a source system quietly changes a field.
Choose Visier if
- You already have a governed model of your workforce
- You have a data team to keep it current
- External benchmarking is a hard requirement
Choose Aragorn if
- Making the data trustworthy is the actual project
- You want HR to own the definitions, not IT or a vendor
- You want a finding to end in a change, not a chart
Every people analytics platform reads a model like this. The question is who built yours.
Employees, positions, status, pay, org and movement, all related properly, permissioned, versioned, and repopulated on a schedule. It is the thing a dashboard is a view of.
Connected
Generated for you
Your own
Visier needs one of these to exist before it can tell you anything. So does One Model, so does Crunchr, so does a dashboard your team builds in Tableau. None of them build it. That project is yours to fund and staff.
Three to six months, usually with consultants, before the first number anyone believes.
We build it as a byproduct, not as a project.
We are already moving your employee data between your HR systems, so the model exists because of work you already need done. That machinery is not theoretical: one People Systems team runs 883 changes across 64 connections on it, with no IT and no consultants. Analytics lands in weeks from the day we get access to your systems.
headcountOwned by HRattritionOwned by HRspan_of_controlOwned by HRregrettable_exitOwned by HRIn a vendor's model, every one of these is a change request.
The definitions in it belong to your team.
The reason a headcount number gets argued with is that every team reporting on it defines it their own way. In Aragorn a definition lives with your HR team and changes the same day, not through a change request to a vendor. That is the difference between a governed number and a number somebody has to defend in a meeting.
A findingWritten backThe system that actsWritten back, on a scheduleIt has somewhere to write back to.
Because the layer underneath the model is ours, a finding can be written back into the system that acts on it, on a schedule, and into any system we connect to. A platform that sits on top of your data has nowhere to write to, and that is a consequence of where it sits rather than a feature nobody got around to.
Two surfaces, one set of definitions.
The same model answers a dashboard and answers an employee in Slack, with the same permissions and the same lineage. Not an analytics tool with a chat feature bolted on, and not a chatbot guessing at a warehouse. One model, two surfaces, and an entity read by both is the same entity.
What it takes to have one of these
Nine questions, and not one of them is about who has more dashboards.
Fix the foundation, add the action and the reach, decide about consolidation at renewal.
Keep Visier. We go underneath.
Visier is the most mature analytics platform in the category, and a data team that likes it should keep it. What it needs is a trustworthy model loaded into it, and that is the job we do.
We will not send you a benchmark report. We will build your metric on your model, in the room.
The fastest way to know is to watch it happen on your own data. One metric, your systems, twenty minutes.
One metric, built on your data
You name it. Headcount, attrition, span of control. We build it from your systems in the session and you check the definition against yours.
The same number in two places
One definition, shown in a dashboard and answered in Slack. If they disagree, you have found the thing this page is about.
A write-back, scheduled in front of you
Pick a system we connect to and watch a result get written back to it, on a schedule, while you are in the room.