Case studies

Three engagements, written up in full.

An agency losing roles on speed, a retail chain whose screening capacity capped its store-opening plan, and a capability centre whose board had approved more seats than the market contained. What was wrong, what changed, and what came out of the stack.

See it on your own requisition Customer stories

Customers are anonymised — deliberately

Most talent teams will not publish their time-to-fill, agency spend and attrition numbers beside their company name, and we would rather have the numbers than the logo. Each study states the sector, team size, location and scope so you can judge whether it resembles your situation — and we will introduce you to a reference customer directly on a demo call.

Ask for a reference call →

Free forever for 1 user No credit card required

One platform ATS, HRMS, interviews and sourcing

Human-in-the-loop AI Every score shows its evidence

Built in Noida, India Serving hiring teams worldwide

GDPR · SOC 2 · ISO 27001 Compliant with these frameworks

01 The case studies 3 engagements

Pick the one that looks like your problem.

Staffing agency They were losing roles on speed, not on quality.

A fourteen-recruiter IT staffing firm was consistently second to submit. Nothing was wrong with their candidates — the first credible shortlist simply arrived a day after someone else's, and in contract staffing that is the whole game.

IT staffing agency · 14 recruiters · Noida and Pune · Two quarters · Live in 9 days, mid-quarter

ATSVendor managementClient portalsInterview intelligenceContract billing

Read the case study

3.9 hrs Median brief to first submission, from 2 days

+38% Placements per recruiter per quarter

9 pts Gross margin improvement

31% Higher submission-to-interview rate

“We used to lose roles on speed, not on quality. Now the first submission goes out in under four hours and our clients notice which agency called back first.”

Director, IT staffing firm · 14 recruiters across Noida and Pune

High-volume hiring They interviewed the first hundred who applied, not the right hundred.

A national retail chain hires around 1,800 frontline people a year across forty stores. Applications were never the problem — reading them was. Screening capacity, not candidate supply, was setting the pace of every store opening.

Retail · 40 stores · ≈1,800 hires a year · Three quarters · Live in 12 days, one store first

ATSAI screening at volumeWhatsApp screeningWalk-in and campus drivesHRMS

Read the case study

−58% Cost per seat filled

11 days Requisition to filled cohort, from 34

4,200 Applicants ranked per role, all of them

−22% Attrition in the first 90 days

“The difference is not that it is faster — it is that we now interview the right hundred people instead of the first hundred who applied.”

Head of Talent Acquisition, national retail chain · 1,800 hires a year

GCC / capability centre The board had approved 240 seats the market did not contain.

A European manufacturer was standing up an India capability centre in Bengaluru. The headcount plan came from the parent company's budget, not from Indian talent supply — and two of the eight role families did not exist at that volume at the band on offer.

Product engineering GCC · Bengaluru · 240 seats · Four quarters · Started before the Indian entity existed

ATSSourcing and market mapsVendor managementEmployer of recordHRMS and payroll

Read the case study

26 days Median time to fill across the ramp

11 → 3 Agencies on the bench after grading

−34% Agency spend against the original plan

0 Compliance findings at the parent's audit

“The market map said two of the roles did not exist at that volume in Bengaluru at our band. We changed the plan in week two instead of missing the target for three quarters.”

Site lead, European manufacturer's India GCC · 240-seat ramp

02 What each one contains

Four parts, in the same order every time.

A case study that lists only outcomes is an advertisement. These are written so you can work out whether the same mechanism would help you — and decide that it would not, if that is the honest answer.

Take the self-guided tour

01 The problem, before anyone sold anything What was actually going wrong, in the words the team used at the time — not a tidy retrospective that happens to describe our feature list.

02 What changed, mechanism by mechanism Which part of the workflow moved, and why that produced the number. A result without a mechanism is a coincidence you cannot copy.

03 The rollout, week by week Export, dry run, duplicate merge, configuration, parallel run, cutover — with the real dates. Migration risk is the thing buyers underestimate and vendors skip.

04 What was dropped The tools and spreadsheets that came out of the stack. Consolidation is usually where the money is, and it is the part a feature comparison never shows.

03 Related

The products behind these engagements.

Applicant tracking

Intake, ranking with cited evidence, scorecards, submission packs and pipeline that moves itself.

See the ATS →

HRMS and payroll

The accepted offer becomes the employee record, so payroll picks up a joiner without anyone retyping a name.

See the HRMS →

Vendor management

Every agency into one submission workflow with live scorecards on fill rate, quality and effective margin.

Vendor management →

Reviews and evidence

Where to read verified reviews at the source, and what to check that a review will never tell you.

Reviews →

04 Questions

Case studies — frequently asked questions

Why are the customers in these case studies not named?

Because hiring data is sensitive and most talent teams will not put their time-to-fill, agency spend and attrition numbers next to their company name in public. Each study states the sector, the team size, the location and the scope so you can judge whether it resembles your situation, and we will introduce you to a reference customer directly on a demo call.

Can I speak to one of these customers?

Yes. Ask on your demo call and we will introduce you to a team with a similar shape — same segment, similar headcount, similar role families. Reference calls are arranged directly between you and them, and we do not sit in on them.

How long does implementation actually take?

The three engagements here went live in nine days, twelve days and in stages across a four-quarter ramp. The variable is not the software — it is data migration and the number of teams that have to change how they work. A single-team agency migration is days; a forty-store rollout is a pilot store, a measured comparison, then regional waves.

Do you run a parallel period with our existing system?

Yes, and we recommend it. In the agency study both systems ran live for two days before single sign-on was enabled and the old licences were cancelled at renewal, so there was never a moment where a recruiter had nowhere to work.

What is measured in these results?

Operational hiring metrics rather than software usage: median time from brief to first submission, placements per recruiter, gross margin per placement, cost per seat filled, requisition-to-filled-cohort days, 90-day attrition, and agency spend against plan. Each study states the baseline it improved on.

Someone else's numbers are only ever an argument.

Twenty minutes on the requisition that has been open longest at your company, and you keep the shortlist whether or not you buy anything.

Book free demo Ask for a reference call