TeamOhana

Name: TeamOhana
Brand: TeamOhana
Rating: 4.6 (102 reviews)

AI Native

The Only Collaborative Workforce Intelligence Platform

Est 2021|Valuation $28M|Raised $11.5M

LinkedIn 4K|Website|FTEs 42|HQ San Francisco, California, US

MarketsHR Analytics & Workforce Planning Headcount & Workforce Planning

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

TeamOhana versus ChartHop - Comparative review signals indicate reviewers find the vendor favorable on usability and support in certain comparisons. Vendor case narratives suggest different design trade-offs between the tools. - Balanced take: Organizations focused primarily on org visibility and people analytics may find ChartHop aligned to those needs. Organizations focused on budget enforcement and approval workflows tied to hiring may find TeamOhana’s functionality more aligned to that operational problem. TeamOhana versus FP&A/EPM tools (Pigment / Anaplan / Adaptive) - The vendor emphasizes connections to FP&A systems and notes ongoing integration work with some EPM tools. - Balanced take: EPM tools generally perform better when workforce planning must be fully integrated into enterprise financial models. TeamOhana can be appropriate when an organization requires a governed operational layer that is accessible to non-finance users (hiring managers, recruiters) and reduces spreadsheet-driven processes. Adoption trends / market presence - The vendor reports amounts of workforce spend and employee count under management; such vendor-provided metrics are useful as directional indicators but should be confirmed in procurement due diligence.

	TeamOhana	ChartHop	Workday Adaptive Planning
Starting Price	Published entry pricing available from the vendor	Reported entry pricing varies by module	Quote-based (vendor estimate required)
Typical fit	Cross-functional headcount governance with approval workflows and visibility into headcount cost	People data visualization, org charts, and people analytics; modular	FP&A-led organizations that need workforce planning inside an EPM suite
Key strength	Approval workflows and collaboration around budget-impacting changes; positive reviewer sentiment on vendor engagement	Org charting and people analytics focus with modular selections	Deep financial modeling and enterprise planning workflows
Key weakness	May represent an additional system for organizations that already model headcount in an FP&A system; some reported admin tooling gaps and product maturity signals	May not provide the same governance and approval workflow focus for budget enforcement	Implementation complexity and potential cost for narrower use cases

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

TeamOhana versus ChartHop

Comparative review signals indicate reviewers find the vendor favorable on usability and support in certain comparisons. Vendor case narratives suggest different design trade-offs between the tools.
Balanced take: Organizations focused primarily on org visibility and people analytics may find ChartHop aligned to those needs. Organizations focused on budget enforcement and approval workflows tied to hiring may find TeamOhana’s functionality more aligned to that operational problem.

TeamOhana versus FP&A/EPM tools (Pigment / Anaplan / Adaptive)

The vendor emphasizes connections to FP&A systems and notes ongoing integration work with some EPM tools.
Balanced take: EPM tools generally perform better when workforce planning must be fully integrated into enterprise financial models. TeamOhana can be appropriate when an organization requires a governed operational layer that is accessible to non-finance users (hiring managers, recruiters) and reduces spreadsheet-driven processes.

Adoption trends / market presence

The vendor reports amounts of workforce spend and employee count under management; such vendor-provided metrics are useful as directional indicators but should be confirmed in procurement due diligence.

	TeamOhana	ChartHop	Workday Adaptive Planning
Starting Price	Published entry pricing available from the vendor	Reported entry pricing varies by module	Quote-based (vendor estimate required)
Typical fit	Cross-functional headcount governance with approval workflows and visibility into headcount cost	People data visualization, org charts, and people analytics; modular	FP&A-led organizations that need workforce planning inside an EPM suite
Key strength	Approval workflows and collaboration around budget-impacting changes; positive reviewer sentiment on vendor engagement	Org charting and people analytics focus with modular selections	Deep financial modeling and enterprise planning workflows
Key weakness	May represent an additional system for organizations that already model headcount in an FP&A system; some reported admin tooling gaps and product maturity signals	May not provide the same governance and approval workflow focus for budget enforcement	Implementation complexity and potential cost for narrower use cases