Employee Communication & Intranet
Speakap
EU-Made Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Speakap B.V. · www.speakap.com
Compare with Flip → Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Link to this page
Add ?theme=dark to the image address for dark backgrounds.
The badge shows the category and the month of the latest evaluation, and EU-Made where
that is the product’s provenance. It never shows a score.
Speakap at a glance
- Vendor
- Speakap B.V.
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 29 Oct 2026
- Data hosting
- Default not stated; pages mention the EU and the US source, captured 29 Oct 2026
- Free plan
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 29 Oct 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates Speakap 3/5, the mean of 6 judges. Speakap, a Dutch employee app for frontline staff in retail, care and logistics, scores highest on reach and targeting, 8 across the bench: HRIS-synced targeting by location, department and role, simultaneous push and SMS reaching everyone in payroll without an app download, and an exportable record of who was reached. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 29 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 30 Oct 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Speakap, a Dutch employee app for frontline staff in retail, care and logistics, scores highest on reach and targeting, 8 across the bench: HRIS-synced targeting by location, department and role, simultaneous push and SMS reaching everyone in payroll without an app download, and an exportable record of who was reached. Works council and privacy, from 6 to 7, and integration and administration, at 6, rest on BYOD boundaries—a secure work container, no access to GPS, photos or contacts, a remote wipe confined to work data—plus automatic HR sync and documented APIs. Sovereignty is the weak point at 3 throughout: the captured pages give different statements on where employee data sits, one stating US storage with no transfers elsewhere while the privacy statement discloses transfers outside the EEA under EU standard contractual clauses, and no public information names the chain behind push, SMS, translation or the ChatGPT-based journeys. Judges split on engagement and feedback, 5 to 7: onboarding journeys drew high marks, the external-forms survey route drew low ones. Pricing transparency scored 0 to 2; no figures published.
Speaks for it
- Reach and targeting scored 8 across the bench on mass notification with two-way acknowledgement and an exportable record of who was reached, when and how they responded
- App push and SMS go out simultaneously so workers without the app still receive critical texts, with shared kiosks and desktop logins for staff who prefer no phone
- The private-phone pages document a secure work container with no access to GPS, photos, contacts or personal activity, and a remote wipe confined to the work container on departure
- Rollout support explicitly names involving the works council and the union and preparing the GDPR setup
- HR sync automates new hires, role changes and offboarding, with single sign-on on desktop and mobile and a documented API plus developer documentation
Held against it
- Sovereignty scored 3 across the bench: the captured pages give different statements on where employee data sits, one stating storage in the US with no transfers elsewhere and the privacy statement disclosing transfers outside the EEA under EU standard contractual clauses
- The only subprocessors listed with locations are website cookie providers; we found no public information on the chain behind hosting, push, SMS delivery, translation or the ChatGPT-based journeys
- The analytics pages describe login-time measurement, behavior-pattern analysis to predict burnout and dashboards showing who has not responded, and we found no public information on minimum group sizes or anonymity rules
- Surveys arrive only through integration with an external forms tool, and only analytics data is described as exportable — we found no public information on exporting content and users when leaving
- The pricing page names cost drivers but publishes no figures; a price overview comes from a product specialist after a demo
Best for
- You must reach an entire frontline workforce in payroll — the homepage claims the 89 percent of staff without a company email are still reachable — and need proof of delivery
- You are deploying to employees' own phones and need documented BYOD boundaries to bring to works-council talks
- Your admin load is driven by workforce churn and you want new hires, role changes and offboarding synced automatically from the HR system
- You run onboarding programs tailored by role, region or department with fixed 30, 60, 90 or 180-day windows
Avoid if
- You must confirm EU data residency for workforce data before signing — the captured pages give different statements on where employee data sits, and we found no public information naming the product's own delivery chain
- Your works council requires minimum group sizes or anonymity rules for engagement analytics in writing — the pages describe login-time measurement and dashboards showing who has not responded to safety alerts
- You need surveys built into the platform rather than an integration with an external forms tool
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Reach & targeted announcements | 4 of 5 |
| Pages, documents & knowledge | 3 of 5 |
| Engagement, surveys & onboarding | 3 of 5 |
| Works council, private phones & privacy by design | 3 of 5 |
| Integration, identity & administration | 3 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 1.5 of 5 |
Reach & targeted announcements
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How a message reaches every employee: a news feed and announcements on phone, browser and shared devices, targeting by site, department, role and language, access for staff without a company email address (invite codes, phone number, personnel number, QR codes, kiosk or shared devices), push notifications, mandatory reading with read confirmation, urgent alerts, scheduled posts, and reach analytics per message and audience.
0 — Not a communication tool; the company cannot publish news or announcements to employees in the product.
3 — A news feed or announcement channel for employees with company accounts; targeting, access without a company email address and reach figures are basic or not described.
5 — News and announcements targeted by group, site or role, delivered to a mobile app with push notifications and to the browser, employees without a company email address able to log in, and views or reach shown per post.
8 — Targeting by site, department, role and language from HR data, login documented for staff without email or company devices (personnel number, SMS code, shared devices), mandatory reading with read confirmation and reminders, urgent alerts that override quiet settings, scheduled and multi-channel posts (app, email, intranet, screens), and reach analytics per audience.
10 — Reach that can be proved: delivery and reading tracked per channel against the whole workforce, offline access and low-bandwidth delivery documented, crisis messages with acknowledgement and escalation, aggregated reports exportable, and the reach analytics described with the data they use.
The Internal Communications Lead
This is the core of what I buy for: read confirmations and per-post statistics, scheduled publishing, targeting by location, department and role synced from the HR system, and a mass-notification story that reaches everyone in payroll by SMS without any app download, with proof of delivery and an exportable audit trail of who was reached, when and how they responded. Shared kiosks and desktop logins are documented for people without phones, though we found no public information on targeting by language, on alerts that override muted notifications, or on offline and low-bandwidth delivery. 1 2 9 10 15
The Frontline Operations Lead
The mass-notification pages are written for an operation like mine: targeting synced from the HR system by location, department and role, push and SMS fired simultaneously so workers without the app still get critical texts, replies by 'SAFE' message or one tap with a live dashboard, and an exportable record of exactly who was reached and when. The homepage claims the 89 percent of staff without a company email are still reachable, and shared kiosks or desktop logins are offered for anyone who will not use their own phone, with read confirmations and scheduling for admins. Offline and low-bandwidth delivery and targeting by language are not described, which is what keeps it from the top. 1 2 9 10 15
The Microsoft 365 Administrator
Targeting by location, department and role straight from the HRIS, app push and SMS sent simultaneously so workers need no app or registration, read confirmations, scheduled posts, shared kiosks and desktop logins — that is reach I can actually prove, with an exportable record of who was reached, when and how they responded. We found no public information on language-based targeting, reading reminders or alerts that override quiet settings. 1 2 9 10 15
The Works Council Member
The mass-notification pages document HRIS-based targeting by location, department and role, push and SMS going out simultaneously without registration or an app download, reach of everyone in the payroll system, read confirmations, scheduled posts, and an exportable record of who was reached and how they responded. Shared kiosks and desktop logins are offered for staff who prefer not to use their own phone, which matters on our shop floors. I found no public information on offline or low-bandwidth delivery or on alerts overriding quiet settings, so it stops just short of the top level. 1 2 9 10 15
The Data Protection Officer
The mass-notification pages document HRIS-synced targeting by location, department and role, app push and SMS sent simultaneously without registration, two-way acknowledgment whose dashboard shows managers who has not responded, and an exportable record of who was reached and when; read confirmations, scheduled posts and shared kiosks or desktop logins for staff without a phone are also described. We found no public information on targeting by language, reminders for mandatory reading or offline delivery. 10 9 15 1 2
The Skeptic
The mass-notification pages are the strongest evidence: targeting by location, department and role synced from the HR system, app push and SMS sent simultaneously so workers without the app still receive critical texts, two-way acknowledgement with a dashboard showing who has not responded, and an exportable record of who was reached and when. Shared kiosks and desktop logins are documented for staff who prefer no phone, alongside read confirmations, scheduled posts and reach claimed against the whole payroll. We found no public information on targeting by language, alerts that override quiet settings, or offline and low-bandwidth delivery, which keeps it short of provable reach. 10 9 2 15 1
Pages, documents & knowledge
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What employees can look up: intranet pages and a content management system, documents and policies with versions and owners, search across content and connected systems, a people directory and org chart, multilingual content with machine translation of posts and pages, content review and expiry, and access from the app as well as the browser.
0 — No pages or documents; the product carries only messages that scroll away.
3 — Files or simple pages can be shared; search, translation, a people directory and content governance are basic or not described.
5 — Pages and a document area with permissions, search across the content, a people directory, content available in the mobile app, and posts or pages translatable into several languages.
8 — A content management system with templates, page ownership, review dates and versioning, search across connected systems (SharePoint, Google Drive or similar), automatic translation of posts, pages and comments into named languages, an org chart from HR data, and pages readable offline.
10 — Knowledge that stays current: content lifecycle and expiry enforced, search and AI answers that cite their sources and respect permissions, analytics on what is searched and not found, accessibility of the content stated against WCAG, and a full export of pages and documents.
The Internal Communications Lead
The built-in knowledge base gives me categories with granular permissions by country, region, department, location and team, search across titles, descriptions and article content, built-in translation, and access on desktop and mobile, with SharePoint documents shareable inside the network. We found no public information on versioning, review dates or page ownership, on a people directory or org chart, on the languages covered by translation, or on offline reading. 11 12 17
The Frontline Operations Lead
The knowledge base is built in with no setup: folder-like categories with granular permissions by country, region, division, location or department, search across titles, descriptions and article content, videos, images, files and links, built-in translation, and access on desktop and mobile — a picker can find the safety rules in their own language. Documents from SharePoint and Google Drive can be shared into the network, and a contact list updates daily from the HR sync. We found no public information on versioning, review dates, an org chart or offline reading. 4 11 12 17
The Microsoft 365 Administrator
The knowledge base offers folder-style categories with granular permissions by country, region and department, search across titles, descriptions and article content, built-in translation, access on desktop and mobile, a contact list kept current by daily HR sync, and SharePoint and Google Drive documents surfaced inside the app. We found no public information on versioning, review dates, page ownership, an org chart, offline reading, or search that reaches into the connected systems themselves. A good internal content area — not yet a governed intranet. 10 11 12 16 17
The Works Council Member
The knowledge base is documented with folder-like categories, permissions by country, region, division, location and department, search across titles, descriptions and article content, built-in translation, and access on desktop and mobile, with SharePoint and Google Drive integration for documents. I found no public information on a people directory or org chart, on versioning, review dates and content ownership, or on offline reading, so it does not reach the level of a fully governed content system. 11 12 17 4
The Data Protection Officer
A knowledge base with folder-like categories, permissions by country, region, location and department, search across titles, descriptions and article content, built-in translation into several languages and access on desktop and mobile is documented, with documents reachable through SharePoint and Google Drive integrations. We found no public information on a people directory or org chart, versioning and review dates, or offline reading of pages. 11 12 17 4
The Skeptic
A built-in knowledge base is well documented: folder-like categories with granular permissions by country, region, division, location and department, search across titles, descriptions and article content, rich content types, built-in translation, and access on desktop and mobile. SharePoint and Google Drive appear as sources for sharing documents rather than as searchable connected systems. We found no public information on versioning, review dates, page ownership, an org chart or offline pages, so this sits at a solid mid-level. 11 12 17 16
Engagement, surveys & onboarding
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How the workforce answers back and gets started: comments, reactions and moderation, employee surveys and pulse checks with anonymity rules, recognition, user-generated posts and communities, onboarding journeys for new starters including those without a desk, event and campaign pages, and the measures the vendor offers to report engagement.
0 — One-way only; employees cannot react, comment or answer in the product.
3 — Likes and comments on posts; surveys, moderation and onboarding are basic or not described.
5 — Comments and reactions with moderation, surveys or polls sent to targeted groups with results shown, employee posts or communities, and an onboarding area or journey for new employees.
8 — Pulse and engagement surveys with a stated anonymity threshold, automated onboarding journeys timed from the start date and reaching new starters before their first shift, recognition, communities with moderation rules, and engagement reported per group without exposing individuals.
10 — Listening that leads to action: survey results tied to follow-up tasks and published back to the workforce, anonymity and minimum group sizes documented, onboarding journeys measured by completion, and engagement data exportable for analysis.
The Internal Communications Lead
Onboarding journeys are a real strength: automated multi-step journeys tailored to groups, regions and departments, time-gated resources for the first 30 to 180 days, quizzes with progress tracked in the admin panel, and recognition named as a platform module, with reactions and comments measured in the analytics. Surveys, however, arrive only through integration with an external forms app rather than a native tool, and we found no public information on anonymity rules, moderation or employee-created communities. 1 4 13 14
The Frontline Operations Lead
Onboarding journeys are tailored to role, location and industry — the page literally names onboarding store managers and training logistics teams — with quizzes, real-time progress and quiz results, resources gated to the first 30, 60, 90 or 180 days, and e-learning integrations, which is close to what I need for a new starter's first shift. Engagement and interaction data is reported per group, recognition is named in the platform scope, and analytics are pseudonymised. Surveys, though, arrive only by integrating an external forms app, and we found no public information on anonymity rules or minimum group sizes. 1 4 11 13 14
The Microsoft 365 Administrator
Onboarding is genuinely built: automated multi-step journeys tailored to groups, regions and roles, opened in day windows of 30 to 180, with quizzes and real-time completion and progress tracking. Reactions and comments exist with insight dashboards on them, but surveys arrive only through an external forms tool, and we found no public information on moderation rules, communities, anonymity thresholds or minimum group sizes in engagement reporting. 1 3 13 14 16
The Works Council Member
Automated employee journeys tailored by role, region and department, with quizzes, real-time progress tracking in the admin panel and time windows covering a new starter's first 30 to 180 days, go beyond a simple onboarding area, and recognition is named on the platform overview. Listening back runs through an integration with an external forms tool rather than native surveys. I found no public information on anonymity rules or minimum group sizes for surveys, and the engagement metrics are described as identifying who is actively participating — a granularity I would need limited in a works agreement. 13 11 4 16 14 1
The Data Protection Officer
Automated onboarding journeys tailored to role, region and department with 30/60/90/180-day windows, quizzes and progress tracked in an admin panel are well described, reactions and comments are covered by the analytics, and recognition is named as a platform module. Surveys appear only as an integration with a preferred forms app, and we found no public information on anonymity rules, minimum group sizes or moderation. 13 14 4 1
The Skeptic
Onboarding is the strongest part: automated employee journeys tailored to groups, regions and departments, content time-boxed to the first 30, 60, 90 or 180 days, quizzes, and progress tracked in real time in an admin panel. Feedback runs through comments and reactions tracked in the analytics, and surveys arrive via integration with an external forms tool; recognition appears only as one word in a module list. We found no public information on anonymity rules, moderation, communities, or survey results being published back to the workforce. 13 14 3 4 1
Works council, private phones & privacy by design
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether the product can be rolled out under German co-determination and data protection: guidance or a template for a works agreement (Betriebsvereinbarung, § 87 BetrVG), no individual performance or behaviour monitoring by default, read and usage analytics aggregated or configurable, use on private phones without a company device (BYOD) with work and private data separated, quiet hours and availability settings, voluntary use without an employee email address, data minimisation and deletion, and accessibility.
0 — Built to monitor the behaviour or performance of individual employees, with that monitoring sold as a feature.
3 — A general GDPR statement; works council, use on private phones, analytics on individuals and quiet hours are basic or not described.
5 — Use on private phones described with what the employer can and cannot see, analytics shown in aggregate, notification or quiet-hour settings, and works councils or employee representatives named as a topic with information offered.
8 — A works-agreement template or checklist published, individual tracking off by default or switchable per tenant, read confirmations limited to messages that require them, quiet hours enforced, a login without a private email or phone number, data minimisation and deletion periods stated, and accessibility to WCAG or BITV stated.
10 — Co-determination built into the product: every analytics view and its granularity documented for the works council, configuration logged, employee-facing privacy notices in the app, minimum group sizes for every report, and published references of works-council-approved rollouts.
The Internal Communications Lead
Rollout support explicitly includes involving the works council and the union, which is exactly what I need before eleven sites see this, and the private-phone page is unusually concrete: a separate encrypted work container, no access to GPS, photos or contacts, remote wipe of the work container only, and notification settings tied to working hours, backed by stated deletion periods and pseudonymised analytics. We found no public information on a published works-agreement template or on accessibility standards, and the analytics pages describe behavioural-pattern analysis to predict bottlenecks and burnout, which any works council will want to examine against the stated no-monitoring stance on personal devices. 1 3 8 15
The Frontline Operations Lead
The private-phone page is the clearest I have read: a secure work container separating work from personal data, no access to GPS, photos, contacts or personal activity, a remote wipe on departure that touches only the work container, and employees able to mute notifications or align settings with their working hours. Analytics run pseudonymised with a stated maximum retention, deletion periods are listed per data type, and the rollout offer explicitly names involving the works council and the union plus preparing the GDPR setup. We found no public information on a published works-agreement template or accessibility to WCAG or BITV. 1 8 15
The Microsoft 365 Administrator
The BYOD material is unusually concrete: a secure work profile separates work from private data, the app cannot access GPS, photos or contacts, remote wipe is confined to the work container, and employees can mute notifications by working hours. Retention periods are stated — analytics pseudonymised for at most three years, service data up to a year after contract end — a DPO and the Dutch supervisory authority are named, and involving the works council and union is offered during rollout. We found no public information on a works-agreement template, enforced quiet hours, WCAG accessibility or minimum group sizes in reports. 1 8 15
The Works Council Member
The BYOD material is what I would bring to the first meeting: a secure work container, no access to GPS, photos, contacts or personal activity, notification settings by working hours, remote wipe of the work container only, and shared kiosks for anyone who will not install on a private phone; the onboarding assistance explicitly names involving the works council and the union, retention periods are stated, and analytics data is described as pseudonymised for a maximum of three years. Against that, the analytics pages describe managers seeing who has read a post, who has not answered a safety alert, who is actively participating, and login times. I found no public information on individual tracking being off by default or switchable per tenant, a published works-agreement template, enforced quiet hours, or accessibility standards — exactly what I would need before signing anything. 15 1 8 9 10 3 14
The Data Protection Officer
The BYOD page is unusually concrete: a separate encrypted work container, no access to GPS, photos, contacts or personal activity, remote wipe of the work container only, and notification settings tied to working hours, while rollout support explicitly names involving the works council and union and preparing the GDPR setup. Retention periods are stated (analytics pseudonymised for at most three years, service data at most one year after contract end), but individual-level visibility such as measured login times and dashboards showing who has not responded comes without documented aggregation or minimum group sizes, and we found no published works-agreement template or accessibility statement against WCAG or BITV. 15 1 8 3 10
The Skeptic
The BYOD story is unusually concrete: a secure work container separating work from private data, no access to GPS, photos, contacts or activity outside the platform, remote wipe of the work container alone on departure, notification settings by working hours, and onboarding help that explicitly includes involving the works council and union; retention periods and a Dutch supervisory authority are stated. What a Betriebsrat will ask next is unanswered — the analytics pages market login-time measurement, behavior-pattern analysis to predict burnout and benchmarking across departments, locations and roles, and we found no public information on minimum group sizes, anonymity rules, configurability of individual-level visibility, a works-agreement template or accessibility standards. 15 1 8 3 14
Integration, identity & administration
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How the product fits the company's systems and is run: Microsoft 365, SharePoint, Teams and Google Workspace integration, user provisioning from the HR system or directory (Entra ID, SAP SuccessFactors, Personio, Workday), single sign-on and SCIM, roles and admin rights by site or department, an API and webhooks, integrations with shift planning and payroll for frontline links, white-label apps, and an export of content and users when leaving.
0 — Stand-alone with manual user lists and no integration of any kind.
3 — Users imported from a file and a few links to other tools; single sign-on, provisioning and an API are basic or not described.
5 — Single sign-on with named identity providers, users provisioned from a directory or HR system, Microsoft 365 or Google Workspace integration, several named integrations, and a documented API.
8 — Automated provisioning by SCIM or HR connector including staff without email, delegated administration by site or department, integration in Microsoft Teams and SharePoint, connectors for named HR, shift and payroll systems, webhooks, a white-label app option, and an audit log.
10 — Runs as part of the company's systems: a public developer platform with versioned API and SDKs, every integration documented, a status page and stated SLA, and a full export of content, users and analytics that a successor system can import.
The Internal Communications Lead
User lifecycle runs itself: automatic HR synchronisation for new hires, role changes and offboarding, with single sign-on on desktop and mobile, named SharePoint and Google Drive integrations, connectors for scheduling, forms and e-learning, and publicly documented APIs with an API marketplace. We found no public information on SCIM, Microsoft Teams integration, webhooks, delegated administration by site or department, named HR or payroll systems, or a white-label app option. 4 7 16 17
The Frontline Operations Lead
The HR sync automates new hires, role changes and offboarding — with my seasonal contracts that alone saves real admin work — and there is single sign-on on desktop and mobile, an app directory, developer documentation, integration categories for HR, engagement, task management, scheduling and e-learning, plus named SharePoint and Google Drive document sharing. But no identity provider is named anywhere, and we found no public information on SCIM provisioning, Microsoft Teams integration, webhooks, admin rights delegated by site or department, or a white-label app. 4 7 16 17
The Microsoft 365 Administrator
HR sync that automatically provisions new hires, role changes and offboarding is documented, single sign-on exists on desktop and mobile, SharePoint documents can be shared within the network, and there is a real API with developer documentation plus an app directory and API marketplace. The identity providers are never named, and we found no public information on SCIM provisioning, a Microsoft Teams integration, delegated administration by site or department, webhooks, a white-label app, or a full export of content and users at contract end — only analytics data is described as exportable. After watching an intranet project die as a second SharePoint, I want those exits in writing before I sign. 3 4 16 17
The Works Council Member
There is a documented API with developer documentation, an app directory and API marketplace, automatic HR sync for new hires, role changes and offboarding, single sign-on, and named integrations for SharePoint, Google Drive, scheduling, e-learning and forms. We found no public information on SCIM provisioning, webhooks, delegated administration by site or department, a white-label app option, or a Microsoft Teams integration, so it sits clearly above the middle level but not near the top. 4 16 17 7 10
The Data Protection Officer
A documented API with developer documentation, single sign-on, automated HR-system sync for new hires, role changes and offboarding, named SharePoint and Google Drive integrations plus scheduling, e-learning and forms connectors through an app directory, and permissions delegated by country, region, location and department are all evidenced. We found no public information on SCIM provisioning, webhooks, a white-label app option or an administration audit log. 4 16 17 11 7
The Skeptic
HR integration with automatic syncing of new hires, role changes and offboarding, single sign-on on desktop and mobile, named SharePoint and Google Drive integrations, connectors for scheduling, e-learning and forms, and an API marketplace with developer documentation are all evidenced. We found no public information on which identity providers are supported, SCIM, webhooks, a white-label app, delegated administration or an audit log, and the only export documented covers analytics — we found no public information on exporting content and users when leaving. 4 16 17 7
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Who the contracting entity and the parent company are, where employee profiles, messages, files and usage data are hosted, and who the subprocessors are (hosting, push notifications, email and SMS delivery, video, translation, AI models, analytics, support). Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; an employee app holds data on the whole workforce, often on private phones, so the whole chain counts, not only the database.
0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting unstated, subprocessors unnamed, and no data processing agreement offered.
3 — A privacy policy and a data processing agreement exist, but hosting location is unstated or non-EU and the subprocessors are not listed.
5 — EU hosting available and an EU contracting entity or EU representative, but parts of the chain (push delivery, translation, AI, email, analytics, support) run through non-EU providers without a stated safeguard.
8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, subprocessors listed with their locations, a data processing agreement published, and security certifications (ISO 27001, SOC 2) stated.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: European ownership, entity, hosting and every subprocessor, or self-hosting on the customer's own servers, data export and deletion documented, and certifications published with their scope rather than implied.
The Internal Communications Lead
The contracting picture is European — Speakap B.V. in the privacy statement, a German company in Cologne in the imprint — but one captured page states that data is stored in the US and never moved elsewhere, while the privacy statement discloses transfers outside the EEA under EU standard contractual clauses, so I cannot confirm EU hosting for our workforce data. The named third parties are website cookie and analytics providers, several of them US-based; the product's own chain — push, SMS, translation and the ChatGPT-powered features — is not named anywhere I can see. 7 8 10 13
The Frontline Operations Lead
The captured pages give different signals: one product page states that data is stored in the US and never transferred to other locations, while the independently collected sovereignty attributes mark hosting and ownership as unconfirmed on the vendor's own pages — EU hosting is evidenced nowhere. The contracting side is European: Speakap B.V., Speakap Germany GmbH in Cologne, a named data protection officer and the Dutch supervisory authority, ISO 27001 and SOC 2 Type II certification, and cookie-level subprocessors listed under standard contractual clauses. We found no public information on a data processing agreement or on the product's core subprocessors such as push, SMS or the ChatGPT-based AI features. 5 7 8 10
The Microsoft 365 Administrator
There is an EU face — Speakap B.V. in the Netherlands, a German entity in Cologne, a named DPO, the Dutch supervisory authority, EU standard contractual clauses for transfers outside the EEA, and ISO 27001 plus SOC 2 Type II. But the captured pages give different signals on where the data sits: one page states data is stored in the US and never transferred elsewhere, and the subprocessors listed with locations are website cookie providers, so we found no public information on the product chain for push and SMS delivery. For an app holding the whole workforce's profiles on private phones, that chain has to be named. 5 6 8 10
The Works Council Member
Speakap B.V. is the named contracting entity with a German subsidiary in Cologne, and ISO 27001 and SOC 2 Type II are stated. The captured pages give different figures for where employee data sits: one page states data is stored in the US and never transferred elsewhere, while the privacy policy describes transfers outside the EEA under EU standard contractual clauses. I found no public information on the subprocessors behind the app's own chain — push, SMS, translation or the AI feature — so the whole chain cannot be assessed from public pages, which for a workforce-wide app is a real problem. 8 7 10 5
The Data Protection Officer
One captured page states that data is stored in the US and will never be transferred to other locations, while no captured page names the hosting infrastructure for employee messages, files and usage data; the privacy policy discloses transfers outside the EEA under EU standard contractual clauses, and a New York address appears in a page footer alongside Speakap B.V. and Speakap Germany GmbH as contracting entities. Only website cookie providers are listed as third parties (Act-On, HubSpot, Google and LinkedIn in the USA, Hotjar in Malta); we found no public information on subprocessors for hosting, push, SMS delivery, translation or the ChatGPT-based AI feature, nor a published data processing agreement, though ISO 27001 and SOC 2 Type II are stated. 10 8 13 5 7
The Skeptic
Speakap is a Dutch B.V. with a German GmbH in Cologne, ISO 27001 and SOC 2 Type II certifications, and a privacy policy naming a DPO and invoking EU standard contractual clauses for transfers outside the EEA. But the captured pages give different statements on where employee data sits — the mass-notification page states "Data is stored in the US and will never be transferred to other locations" — and we found no public information naming the hosting provider or the product's own delivery chain for push, SMS, translation and the ChatGPT-based journeys; the subprocessors listed with locations are US website-cookie services. An EU letterhead over a stated-US storage arrangement with SCCs as the only safeguard shown is not sovereignty. 10 8 5 7 13
Pricing transparency
not rated — the vendor publishes no price
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone: price per user or per employee, whether frontline and desk staff are priced differently, platform or base fee, which modules (intranet, employee email, surveys, translation, AI, a white-label app) cost extra, minimum seats and term, and setup and onboarding fees.
0 — No public prices at all; every customer is a sales call.
3 — A starting price or a free tier exists, but how cost scales with users, modules or a branded app is unclear.
5 — Tiers are public with their per-user or base price and main inclusions, but at least one commonly needed piece (frontline users, translation, a branded app, extra modules) is unpriced or "on request".
8 — Every tier priced publicly with its scaling rule (per user, per frontline user, per active user), add-ons and a branded app priced, minimum seats and term, setup fees and VAT treatment stated.
10 — Complete price computability: annual cost derivable for a given headcount and module set, with every add-on, setup, support and branded-app fee and the cancellation and data-return terms published.
The Internal Communications Lead
The pricing page shows no figures at all: it names the cost drivers — number of users, feature scope, access to integrations — and promises a transparent price overview from a product specialist after a 15-minute demo. The workforce analytics product is positioned as a separate premium offering with no price, so I cannot begin to compute an annual cost for 3,000 people from public pages. 6 14
The Frontline Operations Lead
The pricing page names the cost drivers — number of users, feature scope, access to integrations — but publishes no figures; after a 15-minute demo a product specialist sends a price overview based on headcount and requirements. For 1,800 staff with seasonal peaks I cannot compute an annual cost from public pages, and we found no public information on frontline versus office pricing, minimum seats, term, or setup fees. 6
The Microsoft 365 Administrator
The pricing page names its cost drivers — number of users, feature scope, access to integrations — but publishes no figures; a transparent price overview comes from a product specialist only after a demo. We found no public information on per-user or frontline pricing, a base fee, priced modules, minimum seats, term, setup fees or VAT treatment. 6
The Works Council Member
The pricing page names the cost drivers — number of users, feature scope and access to integrations — but the only route to a figure is a price overview from a product specialist after a demo, based on headcount and requirements. I found no public information on per-user prices, tiers, a starting price or a free tier, so no buyer can compute an annual cost from these pages. 6
The Data Protection Officer
The pricing page names the cost drivers — number of users, feature scope, access to integrations — but publishes no figures, and the price overview is promised only from a product specialist after a demo. We found no public per-user price, tiers, term or setup fees. 6
The Skeptic
No public price of any kind appears on the pricing page; it names the cost drivers — number of users, feature scope, access to integrations — and then says a product specialist will send a "transparente Preisübersicht" based on employee count after a demo. That is a sales call, not a figure a buyer can check. Setup fees, minimum seats, term and separate frontline pricing are all undocumented. 6
European sovereignty — proven facts
0 of 6 dimensions provenBuilt only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.
| Legal entity | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hosting location | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Hosting options | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Open source | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data processing agreement | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Transfer impact assessment | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Questions about Speakap
Is Speakap European?
Yes. whats-best.ai classifies Speakap as EU-Made.
Where does Speakap store data?
The default storage location for customer data is not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 29 Oct 2026. The vendor’s pages mention the EU and the US as hosting locations, per the vendor’s page captured 29 Oct 2026.
Does Speakap have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 29 Oct 2026.
What are the best alternatives to Speakap?
As of 3 Nov 2026, the panel rates Flip (3.5/5), Workvivo by Zoom (3/5) and Staffbase (3/5) highest among the other 17 Employee Communication & Intranet products evaluated. Ratings that look equal are rounded to half stars; the order uses the unrounded rating, then the name. The highest-rated European alternative is Flip (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Speakap alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 29 Oct 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- Weak sourcing — Hosting location. Not confirmed on the vendor’s own pages as captured.
- AI can misread a source. Extraction and judgement are automated; a citation guarantees traceability, not infallibility. If something here is wrong, say so — no account needed, every report is decided within 5 business days, and accepted corrections are published.
What we left out
A claim that does not survive our checks costs us the claim, not the page. This is what was taken off this one.
- 19 product facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 5 pricing facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 4 compliance facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 2 subprocessors facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 hosting fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 sovereignty dimension could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and is shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us
- 6 of the readings below were written against an earlier fact sheet — a fact has been corrected, added or pulled since. Until the panel next runs on this product you are reading the older judgement. Know more? Tell us
Sources (17)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.speakap.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 2 Features page (employee app) www.speakap.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 3 Features page (analytics) www.speakap.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Integrations page www.speakap.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Security / trust page www.speakap.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Pricing page www.speakap.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Legal notice www.speakap.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Privacy policy www.speakap.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Reach & targeted announcements — found from sitemap www.speakap.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Reach & targeted announcements — found from sitemap www.speakap.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 Pages, documents & knowledge — found from sitemap www.speakap.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 12 Pages, documents & knowledge — found from sitemap www.speakap.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 13 Engagement, surveys & onboarding — found from sitemap www.speakap.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 14 Engagement, surveys & onboarding — found from sitemap www.speakap.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 15 Works council, private phones & privacy by design — found from sitemap www.speakap.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 16 Integration, identity & administration — found from sitemap www.speakap.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 17 Integration, identity & administration — found from sitemap www.speakap.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →