Assessing the existing candidate pool
Identifies relevant candidates within the firm’s CRM or ATS for a new search mandate, helping the team assess the strength of existing relationships without relying on an open-market search.
— Talent & Leadership
Matches a search mandate against a firm’s own CRM or ATS to produce a ranked candidate shortlist, with evidence-backed fit assessments and clear gaps to probe at interview.
1–2 weeks → ~15 minutes
For one complete, review-ready pass
No coding required
— USE CASES
Identifies relevant candidates within the firm’s CRM or ATS for a new search mandate, helping the team assess the strength of existing relationships without relying on an open-market search.
Assesses candidates against weighted criteria and treats mandatory requirements as exclusions. Provides a repeatable ranking with a clear explanation of each candidate’s fit.
Checks assessment claims against the underlying records and flags unsupported statements or missing evidence. Makes uncertainty visible rather than presenting incomplete profiles as confirmed matches.
Provides a candidate dossier with ranked recommendations, supporting evidence and gaps to probe at interview. Uses record references rather than personal identifiers by default and retains human approval over release.
— HOW IT BEHAVES
The mechanics behind this specific template — what it reads, what it calculates, and where a human stays in the loop.
Findings on the candidate pool are written up as a document that reads like professional output, with each claim tied back to a candidate.
Detail rows are summarised into the grouped view of the candidate pool without losing the underlying candidates.
Each candidate is assessed against explicit criteria you control, so the same standard is applied across the candidate pool on every run.
The run works from CVs, applications and interview notes you supply, so conclusions about the candidate pool are anchored to your evidence rather than general model knowledge.
Candidate databases hold valuable relationships, but inconsistent records and varied descriptions make it difficult to judge who fits a new mandate. Assessing the existing candidate pool is the typical trigger — identifies relevant candidates within the firm’s CRM or ATS for a new search mandate, helping the team assess the strength of existing relationships without relying on an open-market search. Done properly it is defensible; done at pace it becomes a judgement call nobody can retrace. And "properly" usually means 1–2 weeks of manual work.
Here the same job runs as a Skill. Your material goes in; ranked candidate shortlist dossier comes out, alongside evidence-backed candidate fit assessments. The criteria, ordering and review points that make the answer trustworthy are encoded in the Skill itself — which is the difference between a structured method and a prompt someone pastes in. Net effect: 1–2 weeks down to ~15 minutes, no drift between runs, and every conclusion traceable back to the evidence behind it.
CRM Candidate Matching Engine exports as a structured SKILL.md file and is MCP-ready, so the same method runs in ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot or your own AI products. Adapt it to your methodology, and the intelligence stays yours — not locked to one vendor.
Builds evidence-backed employee skills profiles within HR systems, mapping documented experience to the organisation’s skills catalogue and assigning proficiency levels using consistent rules.
Assesses how clearly people explain their technical work against a consistent four-level rubric, producing a human-approved report with quoted evidence behind every score.
Reveals how organisational culture is lived through anonymous employee accounts, producing an evidence-backed diagnostic of shared themes, differences between functions and gaps between values and practice.
Turns a high-potential's assessment evidence into an acceleration plan weighted to real experience and exposure, naming the stretch assignments, mentors and programmes that will compound fastest.
Builds a calibrated, reusable benchmark from source material so every later screen, shortlist or review is graded against the same bar.
Maps a set of roles against required competencies and renders the result as a matrix, with clarification and review steps built in.