Quantim vs Harvest: Which Is Right for Your Business?

In the time tracking software market, Quantim and Harvest both address the core need of professional services firms: accurate recording of how time is spent, so that billing is defensible and project costs are visible. Both platforms are capable tools, but they serve different operational profiles. This comparison examines the key areas where the two differ, so that businesses seeking efficiency, reliability, customisation and comprehensive management capability can make an informed choice.

Quantim provides a comprehensive dashboard that serves as a central hub for all time-related activities — showing live project status, team utilisation, budget consumption and pending approvals in a single view. Harvest does not offer a comparable dashboard. For a manager overseeing multiple projects simultaneously, the absence of a unified overview means switching between reports and screens to piece together a picture that should be immediately visible. This difference is not cosmetic: the time a manager spends assembling status information manually is time not spent acting on it. The reporting structures that make centralised visibility actionable for project-led organisations are explored in our article on what high-performance project dashboards must include.

Quantim's timesheet functionality is built around a template-based design that allows users to complete their timesheets in seconds by confirming pre-populated project and activity structures rather than selecting from scratch each time. Pre-defined formats cater to various job roles and project types, which matters in firms where an engineer, a project manager and a director all log time differently against the same project. The ability to modify templates and layouts to align with actual workflows means the system adapts to the organisation rather than requiring the organisation to adapt to the system.

Harvest takes a more rigid approach, offering timesheet management without meaningful customisation options. Users must work within the software's predefined structures, which creates friction whenever a firm's projects, billing arrangements or reporting requirements do not match what Harvest anticipated. For businesses with straightforward, uniform project structures this may be acceptable. For professional services firms managing varied client engagements with different fee structures and reporting obligations, the lack of flexibility becomes a real operational constraint. The direct commercial link between timesheet design and billable hour capture is explored in our article on how to prevent billable hours from slipping away.

Quantim excels in staff monitoring and expense management, providing intuitive interfaces that simplify task assignment, workload estimation and approval processes. The ability to see who is working on what, at what utilisation level and against which budget, gives managers the information needed to intervene before a resource problem becomes a delivery problem. Harvest offers staff monitoring capability but does not provide the same level of customisation in how that monitoring is configured or reported.

On security, Quantim offers robust controls and granular permission settings that Harvest does not match. Role-based access ensures that sensitive project financial data is visible only to those with the authority to see it — a requirement that becomes particularly important when a platform holds billing records, client project details and staff working data simultaneously. For firms with compliance obligations around data protection, this is not a preference but a requirement. How security provisions connect to operational data integrity in professional services firms is covered in our article on building a culture of accountability with transparent project tools.

Quantim's real-time alerts provide visibility into operations as they happen — flagging missed timesheet submissions, budget thresholds being approached and project milestones at risk. This enables proactive management rather than reactive recovery. Harvest provides reporting and invoicing capability but lacks the automated alerting layer that allows managers to stay ahead of problems rather than discovering them after the fact. Advanced reporting and invoicing in Quantim further equip businesses to produce accurate, defensible invoices from verified time records without manual reconciliation. How automated alerts and real-time reporting translate into smarter billing decisions is explored in our article on the two reports every manager needs for smarter billing.

Both Quantim and Harvest are credible time tracking platforms, and the right choice depends on what a business actually needs from its time tracking infrastructure. Harvest offers a reliable, straightforward approach to time tracking and invoicing that works well for businesses with simple, uniform project structures and no requirement for deep customisation or real-time operational visibility.

Quantim is the stronger choice for professional services firms that need more. The comprehensive dashboard, template-based timesheet design, extensive customisation across all plans, granular security controls, holiday management, real-time alerts and robust reporting combine to deliver a platform that supports the full operational picture — not just time logging in isolation. For firms where billing accuracy, resource visibility and data integrity are commercial priorities rather than secondary concerns, Quantim provides the depth that Harvest does not.

Book a Free Quantim Demo