SeekOut and hireEZ are the two sourcing databases teams most often outgrow or consolidate away from, usually for one of three reasons: per-seat cost after headcount changes, a second tool (Recruiter, an ATS CRM, an AI agent) now covering the same ground, or recruiters simply not logging in. The good news is that both export far better than LinkedIn Recruiter does. This guide is vendor-neutral; the two tools are compared directly in hireEZ vs SeekOut.
What you can take with you
Both tools let you export project/pipeline candidates to CSV, including the contact details you already revealed, so your sourced talent pool is yours. Saved searches and Boolean/AI filters do not export in a reusable form; screenshot or copy them. Sequence templates (hireEZ engagement, SeekOut messaging) are plain text, copy them into a document. Note that contact data you reveal is typically licensed for your use, not for resale or bulk re-import into another vendor's database; read the data-licence clause before you load an export into the new tool.
Migration steps, in order
- Find your renewal and credit position. Both are annual contracts; check the notice window and how many contact credits you have left, and spend remaining credits on roles you are actively hiring for in the last month, so the data comes with you.
- Export every project to CSV with contact fields, and push anyone still active into your ATS so the record of truth is the ATS, not the sourcing tool.
- Decide what the replacement is for. If the reason is cost, compare per-seat databases on a like-for-like seat count. If the reason is time, the question is whether you want faster search (Juicebox) or the search and outreach removed from the recruiter's desk entirely (Noon, Pin). See how to choose a sourcing tool.
- Re-run three live searches in the new tool and compare the top 50 against the incumbent's top 50 for the same role: overlap, email/phone coverage, and how many are already in your ATS (rediscovery is where databases are weakest).
- Rebuild sequences in the new tool rather than copying them; the channel mix (email, SMS, phone) and sending limits differ.
- Switch the ATS integration and confirm candidates still land in the right stage with source attribution, so your sourcing-channel reporting does not break.
- Give notice and archive the exports in a shared drive with a retention date.
What usually breaks
Reporting. Sourcing-channel attribution in the ATS is often keyed to the old tool's integration; re-map it before the switch or your quarterly numbers will show a hole. Contact-data expectations. Teams used to a database's find-rate are surprised by the new tool's; measure it on your own shortlist, not the vendor's claim. Diversity filters. SeekOut's diversity sourcing features in particular have no direct equivalent in most alternatives; if you rely on them, read our diversity sourcing guide before you cancel. Recruiter habit. A database is a place you go; an agent is a thing that comes to you. Changing that rhythm takes a sprint or two of explicit coaching.
Which alternative, by situation
- Same model, different price or coverage: the other of the two (compare), or Gem if you want sourcing inside a CRM.
- Keep searching yourself, but faster: Juicebox.
- Stop searching yourself: Noon or Pin; benchmark data in SourcingBench.
- Agency with many open reqs: see the staffing agency stack.