HR AI Index
Index Vendors › WorkJam · September 2026 Edition
1 category · Ranked

WorkJam

48Judge labels
2First choices
7Negative labels
12 of 12Models named it
1Category
September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.1, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
4% in Frontline employee apps for enterprise buyers
Rank 11 of 97 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 12 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 5% of its 19 labels there were negative.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
In frontline employee apps · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading

Standing by category

Every category where a model named WorkJam for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.
CategoryFunctionShareRankNegative rateLabelsQuadrant
Frontline employee appsOnboarding and employee experience0%11 of 975%19accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for WorkJam yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated WorkJam across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.
ModelFirst choiceAlternativeMentionNegativeLabels
Claude Haiku 4.500101
GPT-5.4 mini02002
Gemini 3.5 Flash00101
Perplexity Sonar02002
Grok 4.1 Fast00213
Mistral Small00101
DeepSeek V4 Flash10102
Llama 4 Maverick00101
Qwen 3.7 Flash01001
Kimi K201102
GLM 4.7 FlashX02002
MiniMax M2.510001

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.
FramingLabels by classFirst choices
Direct7 labelsNone
Paraphrase5 labels1
Comparative22 labels4not counted in share
Budget-constrained3 labels1
Scale-constrained7 labelsNone
Negative4 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative48 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 6 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“large enterprises tend to gravitate toward WorkJam, Staffbase, or Firstup for deeper integrations and scalability” MiniMax M2.5 · Frontline employee apps · comparative prompt · first choice
“Need one app for scheduling + communication + tasks? → Connecteam or WorkJam” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Frontline employee apps · comparative prompt · first choice
“Choose Connecteam or WorkJam if you also need scheduling and task execution.” Perplexity Sonar · Frontline employee apps · comparative prompt · alternative
“Large enterprise wanting a single source of truth: Staffbase or WorkJam.” Kimi K2 · Frontline employee apps · comparative prompt · alternative

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

“More enterprise-leaning but works for mid-sized retail/hospitality B2B; quote-based” Grok 4.1 Fast · Frontline employee apps · paraphrase prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as WorkJam, over the 48 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and WorkJam was named but was not.
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
Connecteam40 of 489Not in the top three
Blink39 of 486Not in the top three
Staffbase37 of 484Not in the top three
Beekeeper32 of 485Not in the top three
MangoApps21 of 482Not in the top three
Firstup20 of 480Not in the top three
YOOBIC16 of 480Not in the top three
Flip14 of 481Not in the top three
Speakap12 of 480Not in the top three
Workvivo11 of 481Not in the top three
A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named WorkJam. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 44 of the 48 answers that named WorkJam and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

mangoapps.com42
changeengine.com28
guideflow.com26
staffbase.com25
joinblink.com23
redeapp.com20
getzelos.com19
crewcheck.io14
getflip.com14
g2.com10

221 of the 221 domain citations in answers naming WorkJam came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when WorkJam's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as WorkJam, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at workjam.com is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.