The Problem
A 14-recruiter agency in Sydney specialising in mid-market tech roles was losing the war for speed. By the time their recruiters had read through inbound applications, ranked candidates, and scheduled screening calls, the best candidates had already accepted offers from faster-moving competitors. Each recruiter was handling roughly 4-6 active roles and screening ~15 candidates a week. and complaining that two days of every week were spent on logistics, not actual recruiting.
The MD's question: "Can we make our recruiters spend more time recruiting?"
What I Built
1. Resume parsing + role-fit scoring. Every inbound resume is parsed by Claude into a structured candidate profile (skills, experience, salary expectations, location, visa status). The candidate is automatically scored against active roles, with an explanation of fit rather than a black-box number.
2. Async screening interviews. For long-list candidates, an automated flow sends a 5-question async video interview (Loom). Submitted videos are transcribed (Whisper), summarised (Claude), and scored on communication, role-relevant signals, and red flags. Recruiters review the AI summary first; only candidates worth a live conversation get one.
3. Candidate sourcing automation. A daily LinkedIn + GitHub + niche-job-board scrape produces a fresh long-list of passive candidates per active role. Personalised outreach messages are drafted by Claude (in the recruiter's voice, based on examples of their best historical messages), queued for the recruiter to review and send.
4. Hiring manager updates. Weekly automated reports per active role: candidates screened, top 3 in the funnel, expected timeline, recommended next steps. Hiring managers stop calling for status; they get the status proactively.
Outcome
The agency hit a quarterly revenue record 90 days into the rollout. Average recruiter income. most of which is commission-based. climbed roughly 60%, dramatically improving retention of the best talent on the team. The agency's hiring-manager NPS climbed 2.7 points. Candidates also reported a better experience: faster feedback, more relevant outreach, fewer ghosted applications.