TimeSubmit vs Harvest: Which Is Better for Consultancies?
If you manage a consultancy and need timesheet software that handles approvals and invoicing without bolting on extra tools, TimeSubmit vs Harvest is a comparison worth examining closely. Both platforms offer time tracking and invoicing, but they serve different audiences. TimeSubmit is built for consultancies, with timesheet approvals and invoicing in one workflow and a dedicated approver role that never sees billing rates. Harvest is a general-purpose time tracker used across freelancers, agencies, and internal teams.
This article breaks down where each platform excels so you can choose the right fit for your consultancy.
Quick Comparison
| Feature | TimeSubmit | Harvest |
|---|---|---|
| Built for consultancies | Yes, purpose-built | No, general time tracker |
| Time tracking | Weekly/monthly multi-project timesheets | Timer-based and manual entry |
| Approval workflows | On every plan, with multiple approvers per project | Enterprise plan only |
| Dedicated approver role | Yes. Approvers count as team members and never see billing rates | No native feature (requires third-party integration) |
| Invoicing from timesheets | One-click from approved timesheets | Basic invoicing included |
| Multi-project timesheets | Yes, log across engagements in one submission | Separate entries per project |
| Free tier | No. Two months free, then $39/mo for up to 5 people | Yes, 1 seat and 2 projects |
| Starting price | $39/mo, covering 5 team members | $9/seat/mo (billed annually) |
| Multi-currency | GBP, USD, EUR, AUD, CAD, NZD, ZAR | USD, EUR, GBP, CAD, AUD |
| GDPR | Built for UK GDPR obligations, with data export and deletion | Yes |
| Real-time dashboards | Yes, live updates without refresh | No, periodic refresh |
| Audit log | Yes (Margin and Enterprise) | Enterprise only |
Competitor pricing verified 31 July 2026.
How Does Time Tracking Compare?
Harvest offers a flexible timer-based approach to time tracking. Consultants can start and stop timers throughout the day, or manually enter hours against specific projects and tasks. It works well for individuals and teams who track time in short bursts across many tasks. The interface is clean and widely liked for its simplicity.
TimeSubmit takes a different approach, built around the consultancy workflow. Consultants complete weekly or monthly timesheets that span multiple projects in a single submission. Each entry captures the project, date, hours worked, billable or non-billable status, and a description. This structure mirrors how most consultancies actually report time to clients: not as a running timer, but as a submitted timesheet ready for review.
For consultancies billing by the hour across multiple client engagements, TimeSubmit's multi-project timesheet entry removes the friction of switching between projects and timers. Harvest's timer model may be preferable for freelancers or teams who prefer real-time tracking.
What About Approval Workflows?
This is where the two platforms diverge significantly.
Harvest includes timesheet submission and reporting features, but structured approval workflows, where a reviewer formally approves or rejects a timesheet, are reserved for the Enterprise plan. For teams on the standard Teams plan, approval requires manual review or third-party integrations via Zapier.
TimeSubmit includes approval workflows across all plans. Consultancy admins configure approvers at the project level, and timesheets follow a structured submit → review → approve/reject flow. Rejected timesheets include comments explaining why, and consultants can revise and resubmit. Admins can also perform overrides with a mandatory reason, maintaining a full audit trail.
The standout differentiator is TimeSubmit's dedicated approver role. Approvers have their own accounts, approve or reject with a reason, and never see financial information like billing rates. They count towards your plan as team members. Harvest has no native equivalent, and getting there means building a workflow through Zapier and ApproveThis, adding cost and complexity.
How Does Invoicing Work?
Harvest provides built-in invoicing that lets you create invoices from tracked time and expenses. You can customise invoice appearance, set payment terms, and send invoices directly from the platform. It integrates with QuickBooks and Xero for accounting sync.
TimeSubmit's invoicing is tightly coupled to the approval workflow. Once timesheets are approved, consultants generate invoices with a single click, or batch multiple approved timesheets into one invoice. PDF invoices support custom templates with your logo, payment terms, footer text, and bank details (sort code, IBAN, SWIFT, routing number). Tax support includes VAT and custom tax percentages with registration numbers.
The key difference: TimeSubmit enforces the consultancy billing cycle. You cannot invoice unapproved time. This prevents billing errors, disputes, and revenue leakage, all of which cost consultancies real money. Harvest allows invoicing at any time regardless of approval status, which offers flexibility but introduces risk.
Pricing Comparison
| Plan | TimeSubmit | Harvest |
|---|---|---|
| Free | None. Practice runs two months free, then $39/mo | $0, 1 seat, 2 projects |
| Entry | Practice $39/mo, covering 5 team members, capped at 5 | $9/seat/mo, unlimited projects |
| Mid-tier | Core $42/mo covering 3 members, then $14 each; Margin $110/mo covering 5, then $22 each | $9/seat/mo (same plan, more seats) |
| Enterprise | From $800/mo covering 25 members, then $32 each | Custom, 50+ seats, SSO, approvals |
| Annual saving | $108/year on Core, $240/year on Margin | ~18% (annual vs monthly) |
Competitor pricing verified 31 July 2026.
The two models are not the same shape, so compare totals rather than headline prices. Harvest charges per seat. TimeSubmit charges a base fee covering a block of team members, plus a rate for each member above that block. A 15-person consultancy pays $135/mo on Harvest's Teams plan billed annually. The same team on TimeSubmit Margin is $90 for the first five members and $22 for each of the other ten, which is $310/mo billed annually, and includes approval workflows, invoicing and an audit log that Harvest puts on higher plans or does not offer. Whether that trades well depends on how much of the approval and invoicing cycle you would otherwise be doing by hand.
Harvest has a permanent free tier for one person. TimeSubmit does not: it gives you two months, then $39 a month, and a card is required to start.
Who Should Choose TimeSubmit?
- Consultancies that need timesheet approvals by someone other than the consultant, without exposing billing rates to the approver
- Firms that want timesheet-to-invoice in one platform with enforced approval gates
- Teams that submit weekly or monthly timesheets across multiple project engagements
- UK-based consultancies needing GBP, sort codes, IBAN support, and British English throughout
- Organisations wanting real-time dashboards with utilisation metrics and live approval queues
- Small to mid-size consultancies that prefer a base fee covering a block of members to a straight per-seat charge
Who Should Choose Harvest?
- Freelancers and solo consultants who prefer timer-based tracking
- Agencies and creative teams that need a simple, lightweight time tracker with broad integrations
- Large organisations already using Harvest across departments who need consistency
- Teams that primarily need time tracking and basic invoicing without complex approval chains
- Businesses that rely heavily on QuickBooks or Xero integrations for their accounting workflow
Verdict
For consultancies that bill clients for time and need approvals before invoicing, TimeSubmit is the stronger choice. It eliminates the gap between tracking time and sending invoices by enforcing a structured workflow: submit, approve, invoice. The dedicated approver role, which reviews hours without seeing billing rates, is something most competitors do not offer at all.
Harvest remains an excellent general-purpose time tracker. If your primary need is simple time logging with accounting integrations, and you don't require formal approval workflows, Harvest is a solid option. But if you're running a consultancy, TimeSubmit is built specifically for you.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can Harvest handle a separate approver role like TimeSubmit?
Not natively. Harvest has no separate approver role, so a distinct approval step means integrating a third-party tool like ApproveThis via Zapier. TimeSubmit includes a dedicated approver role as a core feature. Approvers count towards your plan and never see financial data.
Is TimeSubmit cheaper than Harvest for a small consultancy?
For most consultancies, yes. TimeSubmit's Core plan costs $42/mo covering 3 members, then $14 for each additional member, or $33/mo billed annually. The equivalent on Harvest would be 5 seats at $9/seat/mo ($45/mo billed annually), but without approval workflows or the dedicated approver role. Adding those capabilities on Harvest requires the Enterprise plan at custom pricing.
Can I switch from Harvest to TimeSubmit easily?
TimeSubmit is designed for quick setup. You can create your organisation, add clients and projects, invite consultants, and configure approvers within minutes. There is no automated data import from Harvest, so the two-month trial is there to let you run the full workflow before committing to moving anything.
Ready to see how TimeSubmit handles your consultancy's timesheet workflow? Run it for two months free, then $39 a month.