HR Management
Cezanne HR
Provenance unknown Report an errorPanel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars
Category median
Sovereignty: 1 of 4 dimensions proven
0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Cezanne HR Ltd · www.cezannehr.com
Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Cezanne HR is a UK-vendor cloud HR and payroll suite, and the bench reads it as broad but thinly evidenced, with weighted totals spanning 2.9 to 3.9. Payroll readiness is the strongest criterion at 3–5 — the only 5 awarded on the bench — resting on a stated in-house payroll module plus a managed UK payroll service. Core HR records, time and absence, and recruiting and onboarding cluster at 3–4: module names are all present, but judges repeatedly found no public information behind them — org structure, dated change history, entitlement rules and structured hiring stages are not shown on the captured pages. The genuine split is employee data governance at 2–4: judges crediting the stated GDPR deletion tools scored 3–4, while those demanding a published data processing agreement, retention periods and a read audit scored 2. Sovereignty sits at 2–3: the contracting entity is Cezanne HR Limited of London, the product is cloud-based, no sovereignty attributes are on record, and no public information appears on hosting region or subprocessors. No prices are published; the commercial terms are stated plainly.
Speaks for it
- A stated payroll path — an in-house payroll module plus a managed UK payroll service run by the vendor's team — rather than a hand-retyped spreadsheet.
- One modular suite covers the full join path, naming recruitment, applicant tracking, onboarding, core HR admin, absence and time tracking.
- Compliance features go beyond bare document upload with e-signatures, grievance and disciplinary tracking, right-to-work evidence and mandatory training or certifications.
- Stated GDPR tools let the customer execute deletion or anonymisation of data inside the product under EU and UK GDPR.
- Commercial terms are stated plainly: a monthly subscription adjusted to active headcount and modules, rolling contracts, no upfront costs, no implementation fees, free implementation support.
Held against it
- Sovereignty scored 2–3: the contracting entity is Cezanne HR Limited of London, the product is cloud-based, no sovereignty attributes are on record, and the captured pages give no hosting region, data-centre provider or subprocessor list.
- Employee data governance scored 2–4, with the lowest scorers finding no public information on a published data processing agreement, retention periods, configurable roles or an audit of who read what.
- Payroll is framed for the UK, with no public information on DATEV or other export formats, pre-payroll checks, variable pay, or mid-month joiners and leavers.
- Module names carry little shown detail: no public information on org structure, custom fields, dated contract and salary history, entitlement rules or structured hiring stages.
Best for
- You run a UK-anchored HR operation and want a vendor-run managed UK payroll service alongside the in-house payroll module.
- You want one modular suite for the whole join path — recruitment, applicant tracking and onboarding — and expect to add modules as needs grow.
- Your priority is personnel-file compliance — e-signatures, right-to-work evidence, grievance and disciplinary tracking, mandatory certifications — in a single product.
- You value rolling monthly contracts with no upfront costs, no implementation fees and free implementation support.
Avoid if
- You must clear a works-council or data-protection review before installing: employee data governance scored 2–4, and the low scorers found no public information on a data processing agreement, retention periods or an audit of who read what.
- Your payroll runs in Germany and your tax adviser needs a DATEV or Lohn und Gehalt export: the payroll offering shown is an in-house module plus a managed UK service, with no public information on export formats or a pre-payroll check.
- You must document where employee data is processed or contract an EU entity — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
The scores
Digital personnel file & data model
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
The system of record: employee master data, the digital personnel file, org structure, custom fields, and whether history is kept rather than overwritten.
0 — A contact list with job titles; no document storage, no org structure, no history — changes overwrite what was there.
3 — Employee records with document upload, but a flat structure: no org chart, few or no custom fields, and no dated history of contract or salary changes.
5 — Digital personnel file with structured document types, an org chart, custom fields, and change history on the core employment fields.
8 — Complete record: versioned contract and compensation history with effective dates, document templates with e-signature, org structure supporting multiple entities and cost centres, and granular field-level permissions.
10 — The file is the single source of truth an auditor could work from: full effective-dated history on every field, retention rules per document type, delegated administration per entity, and export that reproduces the record intact.
The People Lead
Core HR admin, document tracking and e-signatures are named, so the personnel file is more than a contact list, but I found no public information on org charts, custom fields or dated history of contract and salary changes — the things that make a record auditable rather than merely current. I'm buying a file that can prove what was true last March, and the captured pages don't show that. 1
The Payroll Officer
Core HR admin with document tracking and e-signatures is on the page, so records go beyond a contact list, but we found no public information on org structure, custom fields, or dated change history on contract and salary changes — and dated history is exactly what I need when a backdated rise lands mid-month. 1
The Works Council Advocate
A core HR admin module is named, with document tracking and e-signatures as compliance features, which puts this above a contact list. But we found no public information on an org chart, custom fields, or dated change history on contracts and salary — that history is what I need for any works-council data audit, and I have to treat it as unevidenced. 1
The Data Protection Officer
The captured pages name a People Management module with document tracking and e-signatures, but I found no public information on an org chart, custom fields, or dated change history on employment or salary terms. That is a document store with compliance features, not the effective-dated personnel file I would hold anyone to. 1
The IT Integrator
Document tracking, e-signatures, and records for grievance, disciplinary and right-to-work events are the concrete file capabilities shown, which is a step above bare document upload; we found no public information on org structure, custom fields, or dated change history, so I cannot treat this as the system of truth an identity owner would build accounts on. 1
The Skeptic
A People Management module, document tracking and e-signatures are named, and that is the whole personnel file the captured page opens: we found no public information on org structure, custom fields, or dated history of contract and salary changes. Records with documents, yes; an auditor's system of record, unevidenced. 1
Payroll handoff
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether the month closes cleanly into payroll — DATEV, Lohn und Gehalt, an in-house system or an external tax adviser — and how much of that is automated rather than re-typed.
0 — No payroll path stated at all; whatever leaves the system leaves as a spreadsheet somebody retypes.
3 — Generic CSV export said to be usable for payroll, with no named payroll system, no defined format and no handling of mid-month changes.
5 — A named payroll integration or a documented export format for at least one major system (e.g. DATEV LODAS/Lohn und Gehalt), covering the recurring monthly fields.
8 — Certified or vendor-maintained integration with a named payroll provider, covering variable pay, absences and mid-month joiners and leavers, with a documented pre-payroll check.
10 — Payroll is a first-class part of the product: maintained bidirectional integrations with several named systems, an auditable approval and lock step before transmission, retro-accounting for backdated changes, and the tax adviser given their own access.
The People Lead
Payroll is named as part of the suite — an in-house payroll module plus a managed UK payroll service — so a path exists rather than a spreadsheet retyped by hand, but I found no public information on handoff to external systems: no named integration, no documented export format, nothing on mid-month joiners and leavers or a pre-payroll check. For closing the month into an external system or a tax adviser, that gap is the whole ballgame. 1
The Payroll Officer
A payroll path is stated — an in-house payroll module and a managed UK payroll service run by the vendor — but we found no public information on a named third-party integration such as DATEV or Lohn und Gehalt, a defined export format, or how variable pay, absences and mid-month joiners and leavers are handled. The month-close mechanics I answer for to the tax adviser are simply not shown. 1
The Works Council Advocate
A payroll path is stated — in-house payroll in the suite plus a managed UK payroll service run by the vendor's own team — so this is not a spreadsheet retyped by hand. Everything payroll is framed for the UK, though, and we found no public information on DATEV, any documented export format, a pre-payroll check, or mid-month joiners and leavers. 1
The Data Protection Officer
A payroll path is named — an in-house payroll module plus a managed UK payroll service — but we found no public information on DATEV or Lohn und Gehalt export formats, mid-month joiners and leavers, or any documented pre-payroll check. What is described is UK payroll outsourcing rather than an integration a German tax adviser could work from. 1
The IT Integrator
An in-house payroll module plus a managed UK payroll service is a real payroll path, more than a generic export claim, but we found no public information on documented export formats, integrations with named payroll systems, mid-month joiners and leavers, or any pre-payroll check. Nothing here shows me a handoff I could automate rather than re-type. 1
The Skeptic
In-house payroll sits on the modules list and a managed UK payroll service is offered, so a payroll path is stated — but we found no public information on any named third-party integration such as DATEV, no documented export format, and nothing on variable pay, mid-month joiners and leavers, or a pre-payroll check. 'Easy connectivity with third-party applications' plus an API reads as endpoints a customer builds against, not a maintained connector. 1
Absence & working-time
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Vacation, sickness and working-time recording — including whether the product meets the German recording duty (BAG 2022, ArbZG) rather than merely offering a timer.
0 — No absence or time handling; both live in a spreadsheet elsewhere.
3 — Vacation requests with an approval step, but entitlement is manual, carry-over is not handled and there is no working-time recording.
5 — Automatic entitlement and carry-over, sickness recording, an absence calendar, and basic working-time capture with a report per employee.
8 — Configurable per country and contract: pro-rata entitlement, public-holiday calendars per location, break and rest-period rules, overtime accounts, and an export the employer can hand to a labour inspection.
10 — Working-time recording built as a legal obligation rather than a feature: tamper-evident records, documented compliance with the ArbZG recording duty, works-council-configurable monitoring limits, and shift or on-call models handled without add-ons.
The People Lead
Absence and Time Tracking both appear as named modules, so vacation and working time at least live in the product rather than in a spreadsheet, but I found no public information on automatic entitlement, carry-over, sickness handling, or the German working-time recording duty. What's visible is module names, not the behaviour a labour inspection would ask about. 1
The Payroll Officer
Absence and Time Tracking modules are named and that is all; we found no public information on automatic entitlement, carry-over, sickness handling, or compliance with the German working-time recording duty, and nothing on an export I could hand to payroll or a labour inspection. 1
The Works Council Advocate
Absence and Time Tracking both appear as named modules, so working-time capture exists in principle rather than living in a spreadsheet. The captured pages give no functional detail, and I found no public information on entitlement rules, sickness handling, compliance with the German recording duty, tamper-evident records, or who can read the captured times — the exact questions I must ask. 1
The Data Protection Officer
Absence and Time Tracking modules are named and nothing more: no public information on automatic entitlement and carry-over, sickness recording, or public-holiday calendars per location. For the German recording duty in particular, we found no public information on break and rest-period rules, tamper-evident records, or an export an employer could hand to a labour inspection. 1
The IT Integrator
Absence and Time Tracking both appear as named modules, so the capability areas exist in name, but we found no public information on automatic entitlement, carry-over, sickness recording, holiday calendars, or compliance with the German working-time recording duty. Named modules are not evidenced features, and I score what is evidenced. 1
The Skeptic
'Holiday and absence management' and 'Time Tracking' appear as module names and nothing else; we found no public information on automatic entitlement, carry-over, sickness recording, holiday calendars, or break and rest rules, and the German working-time recording duty goes unmentioned on the captured page. Named modules with silent interiors. 1
Recruiting & onboarding
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
The join path — vacancy to signed contract to a person who has an account, equipment and a plan on day one.
0 — Neither applicant tracking nor onboarding exists; hiring happens in a shared inbox.
3 — A basic applicant list with statuses, or an onboarding checklist — one of the two, without the handover between them.
5 — Applicant tracking with a careers page, structured stages and rejection handling, plus a checklist-driven onboarding that carries the hired candidate over into an employee record without re-entry.
8 — Multi-posting to named job boards, interview scheduling and scorecards, GDPR-conscious applicant retention and deletion, e-signed contracts, and onboarding that triggers tasks in IT and payroll.
10 — The whole join is one governed flow: approval-gated requisitions with budget, structured and bias-conscious evaluation, automated applicant deletion at the stated deadline, and provisioning driven from the record so day one needs no HR intervention.
The People Lead
Recruitment, applicant tracking and onboarding are all named, and e-signatures exist, so both sides of the join path sit in one product; but I found no public information on a careers page, structured stages, or whether a hired candidate carries into the employee record without re-entry. The handover from offer to day one is precisely what I'm replacing spreadsheets for, and the captured pages don't show it. 1
The Payroll Officer
Recruitment, applicant tracking and onboarding are all named modules, so both halves of the join path exist in name; we found no public information on a careers page, structured stages with rejection handling, or whether the hired candidate carries into the employee record without re-entry. 1
The Works Council Advocate
Recruitment, applicant tracking and onboarding are all named as modules, which is the full join path in name rather than half of it. We found no public information on structured stages, applicant retention and deletion deadlines, e-signed contracts, or whether the hired candidate carries into the employee record without re-entry — applicant data is where subject rights bite hardest, and it goes unaddressed. 1
The Data Protection Officer
Recruitment, applicant tracking and onboarding modules are all named, and e-signatures appear among the compliance features. I found no public information on structured stages, rejection handling, or whether a hired candidate carries into the employee record — and no stated applicant retention period with automated deletion at the deadline; the GDPR tooling is something the customer runs to delete or anonymise data themselves. 1
The IT Integrator
Recruitment, applicant tracking and onboarding all appear in the module list and e-signatures exist in the product, but we found no public information on structured stages, applicant retention and deletion, the candidate-to-employee handover, or IT provisioning driven from the record. Onboarding that cannot be shown to create the account is, to me, a checklist. 1
The Skeptic
Recruitment, applicant tracking and onboarding are all on the modules list, so the join path exists on paper, but the captured page gives no careers page, no structured stages, no interview scheduling or scorecards, and no evidence a hired candidate flows into an employee record without re-entry. E-signatures are named as a compliance feature, not tied to employment contracts. 1
Employee data protection & co-determination
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How the product handles the most sensitive personal data a company holds — retention, deletion, role separation, subject rights — and whether it can pass a works council (BetrVG §87) rather than merely a procurement checklist.
0 — No stated retention or deletion handling, no role model beyond admin-or-not, and no DPA offered on the site.
3 — A DPA exists on request and roles are coarse; retention and deletion are described as something the customer arranges themselves.
5 — A signable DPA is published, roles are configurable per module, applicant and employee retention periods are stated, and deletion can be executed rather than only promised.
8 — Field-level access control with an audit log of who read what, configurable retention per data category with automatic deletion, documented subject-rights support, and monitoring or analytics features that can be switched off for co-determination.
10 — Built for the works council to say yes: published processing documentation and subprocessor list, per-entity data separation, tamper-evident audit trail, evaluation and behavioural-analysis features off by default with their scope documented, and a data-protection impact assessment the customer can build on.
The People Lead
GDPR compliance is claimed with encryption and password protection, and there are tools to delete or anonymise data, which means deletion can be executed rather than only promised; but I found no public information on a signable data processing agreement, configurable roles, stated retention periods, or an audit log of who read what. For a works council review, I found no public information on any of the material I'd need to bring to the table. 1
The Payroll Officer
Tools to delete or anonymise data under EU and UK GDPR are stated alongside encryption and password protection, and grievance, disciplinary and right-to-work tracking show some legislative awareness; we found no public information on a published DPA, configurable roles, stated retention periods, or an audit log of who read what. 1
The Works Council Advocate
The vendor states GDPR tools to delete or anonymise data under EU and UK GDPR, plus encryption and password protection, so deletion can be executed rather than only promised. For my approval under co-determination that is not close to enough: we found no public information on a published data processing agreement, retention periods, role separation per module, an audit log of who read what, or whether the Insights analytics and pulse survey features can be switched off or scoped — a tool that cannot answer those questions does not get installed, however good it is. 1
The Data Protection Officer
What is published amounts to encryption, password protection, GDPR claims, and tools that help the customer delete or anonymise data — deletion the customer executes, with no retention periods per data category and no automatic deletion evidenced. I found no signable data processing agreement on the site, no published subprocessor list, no field-level permissions or read audit trail, and nothing documenting whether the analytics and pulse-survey features can be switched off for a works council; an unpublished DPA is a finding. 1
The IT Integrator
Tools to delete or anonymise data under EU and UK GDPR, plus encryption and password protection, are stated, which puts deletion inside the product rather than in the customer's hands; we found no public information on a published DPA, stated retention periods, granular role models, or any audit of who read what — the questions a works council asks first. 1
The Skeptic
Encryption, password protection and 'tools to help you delete or anonymise data in line with EU and UK GDPR requirements' are the entire governance story; we found no public information on a published data processing agreement, stated retention periods, roles configurable per module, or an audit log of who read what. A works council has nothing published to review yet. 1
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Where the data lives, who the contracting entity is, who the subprocessors are, and whether the answer is documented rather than assumed. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; scored here as the buyer would weigh it.
0 — US-headquartered vendor, US contracting entity, hosting region unstated or US, subprocessors not named.
3 — EU hosting is offered as an option but the contracting entity is non-EU, or the subprocessor list is incomplete or absent.
5 — EU hosting stated as standard and an EU contracting entity, but the subprocessor chain includes non-EU providers without an explained safeguard.
8 — EU or DACH hosting with a named data-centre provider, an EU contracting entity, the full subprocessor list published, and any non-EU processing named with its legal basis.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: vendor, contracting entity, hosting and every subprocessor in the EU, certification of the data centres published, and an on-premises or private-cloud option for buyers who need it.
The People Lead
The contracting entity is a UK company and the product is cloud-based, but I found no public information on hosting region, data-centre provider or subprocessors. A UK entity with unstated hosting is a better starting point than a US one, yet not enough is documented for me to answer where our people's data actually sits. 1
The Payroll Officer
The vendor and contracting entity are Cezanne HR Limited of London, the product is cloud-based with no hosting region stated, and we found no public information on data-centre locations or a subprocessor list — EU and UK GDPR compliance is claimed, and that is the whole of the sovereignty story on the captured pages. 1
The Works Council Advocate
The contracting entity is Cezanne HR Limited of 57 Southwark Street, London — a non-EU entity — and the product is cloud-based with the region unstated. We found no public information on hosting location, the data-centre provider, or any subprocessor list; for a works council that is the first question, and the captured pages leave it open. 1
The Data Protection Officer
The contracting entity is Cezanne HR Limited of 57 Southwark Street, London — a non-EU entity — and the product is cloud-based, yet we found no public information on the hosting region, the data-centre provider, or any subprocessor. EU and UK GDPR compliance is claimed, but nothing documents where employee data is actually processed. 1
The IT Integrator
The contracting entity is a UK company at a London address and the product is described as cloud-based, with no sovereignty attributes on record: we found no public information on hosting region, data-centre provider, or a subprocessor list. For an EU buyer the chain is undocumented, softened only slightly by a UK rather than US entity. 1
The Skeptic
The contracting entity is Cezanne HR Limited at 57 Southwark Street, London, and the product is cloud-based; we found no public information on hosting region, data-centre provider, or any subprocessor by name. A UK entity with GDPR claims standing in for a documented chain is an assumption the buyer is asked to make. 1
Pricing transparency
not rated — the vendor publishes no price
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether an HR lead can compute the real annual invoice for their headcount — including the modules they actually need — from public pages alone.
0 — No public prices at all; every tier is a sales conversation.
3 — An entry price per employee exists, but the modules most buyers need are unpriced, or a minimum headcount, setup fee or mandatory onboarding package is not stated publicly.
5 — Per-employee prices are public for the main tiers with the billing period stated, but at least one commonly needed module (payroll, time, recruiting) hides in an unpriced bundle.
8 — Every tier and module priced publicly with per-employee maths, billing period, minimum term and VAT treatment stated; only genuinely custom enterprise work lacks a number.
10 — Complete price computability: a calculator or table that produces the annual invoice for a given headcount and module selection, including setup, minimums and renewal terms.
The People Lead
The commercial terms are unusually clear — a straight-forward monthly subscription fee adjusted to active headcount and modules, rolling contracts, no upfront costs and free implementation — but no per-employee price figure is published anywhere, so I cannot compute an annual invoice for 400 people from public pages. Honest terms, invisible numbers. 1
The Payroll Officer
The commercial shape is stated plainly — a monthly subscription adjusted to active headcount and modules, rolling contracts, no upfront costs and no implementation fees — but we found no public information on actual per-employee or tier prices, so an HR lead cannot compute the annual invoice from these pages. 1
The Works Council Advocate
The commercial structure is stated plainly: "a straight-forward monthly subscription fee adjusted to match your active headcount and modules", with "no upfront costs, no implementation fees, and no long-term contracts" and free implementation support. No per-employee price is stated on the captured pages, so no HR lead can compute their real annual invoice from public information alone. 1
The Data Protection Officer
No price per employee or per tier appears anywhere in the captured pages, so an HR lead cannot compute even a rough annual invoice. The commercial structure is stated — a monthly subscription adjusted to active headcount and modules, rolling contracts, no upfront costs, no implementation fees, free support and translations — but not a single figure. 1
The IT Integrator
The commercial terms are unusually generous and clearly stated — a monthly subscription adjusted to active headcount and modules, rolling contracts, no upfront costs, no implementation fees, and free implementation support — but we found no public price per employee or per module, so no HR lead can compute the annual invoice from the pages. Terms without numbers still end in a call to sales. 1
The Skeptic
The commercial shape is unusually candid — a monthly subscription adjusted to active headcount and modules, rolling contracts, no upfront costs, no implementation fees — yet not a single figure appears anywhere on the captured page, so an HR lead cannot compute an annual invoice for any headcount. 1
European sovereignty — proven facts
1 of 4 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 ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | EU only ⚠ unverified | 3/3 pts | 2 Report an error |
| Subprocessors | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 22 Sep 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- Weak sourcing — Legal entity. Not confirmed on the vendor’s own pages as captured.
- Weak sourcing — Data residency. The EU-only promise sits in marketing copy on the security page, which also states Cezanne may modify its security infrastructure and that modules may have a different hosting and security architecture.
- 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.
- 8 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
- 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
- 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 legal 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 (8)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor page www.cezannehr.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 2 Security / trust page — found from the homepage cezannehr.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
- 3 Payroll handoff — found from sitemap cezannehr.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Payroll handoff — found from sitemap cezannehr.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Absence & working-time — found from sitemap cezannehr.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Recruiting & onboarding — found from sitemap cezannehr.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Recruiting & onboarding — found from sitemap cezannehr.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Employee data protection & co-determination — found from sitemap cezannehr.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →