Tool
Glean
Enterprise AI search across workplace apps, with permission-aware answers, connectors, agents, and centralized governance.
TL;DR
- Best for enterprise search across many permissioned systems.
- Strong relevance and connector breadth are the buying case.
- Implementation quality depends on permissions, source hygiene, and ownership.
- Pricing is quote-based.
Glean is the heavyweight choice when company knowledge is scattered across Drive, Slack, Notion, Jira, Salesforce, and dozens of other systems. It indexes connected sources, respects source permissions, and uses that retrieval layer for search, answers, and agents.
Decision snapshot
| Best fit | Watch closely |
|---|---|
| Large, fragmented SaaS environments | Rollout effort and custom pricing |
| Employees repeatedly asking where information lives | Bad source permissions remain bad permissions |
| Search plus governed enterprise agents | Relevance must be tested on your own corpus |
Where it earns its keep
Glean is most defensible when ordinary search failure has measurable cost: duplicated work, slow onboarding, repeated Slack questions, or support teams hunting across systems. Its official enterprise-search page lists more than 100 connectors, real-time indexing, permission-aware results, and generative answers.
The real trial is not a polished vendor corpus. Create 30 questions employees genuinely ask, including ambiguous acronyms and stale documents, then measure correct-source retrieval and permission leakage.
What users report
One team comparing Glean, Guru, and 60x said Glean's “search relevance was meaningfully better” on a messy Notion, Slack, and Drive corpus. The same evaluation found connector coverage decisive. That is one team's report, but it identifies the right buying test: your data, your permissions, your ugly queries.
Bottom line
Choose Glean when search is an enterprise infrastructure problem. Choose Guru or Slite when the bigger problem is creating and maintaining a trusted knowledge base rather than searching every system.
