RA
RecruitAudit

Consulting Diagnostic · 14/10/2026

Stratton Partners (Sample)

Potential annual saving

$84,000

Operationally strong but fragmented. ~22% of stack spend is recoverable.

high confidence · 100%

Based on 16 of 16 core inputs. Limitations are listed below.

Overall maturity

64/ 100

Workable, tighten in the next quarter.

high confidence · 100%

Executive Summary

Stratton Partners runs a credible mid-market operation with healthy ATS adoption on Bullhorn and a maturing BD motion through Apollo and SourceWhale. However, three categories, meeting intelligence, sourcing and CRM, show meaningful overlap, and recruiter AI adoption is concentrated in a small group of power users. With a focused 90-day program we estimate $84k in annual savings and a ~14-point lift in operational maturity.

What to do, in order

Highest impact first. Nothing here needs a purchase unless it says so.

Now

Next 30 days

Cancel Fireflies

Kill

Duplicate capability, no migration work, saving lands on the next invoice.

Impact: mediumEffort: low

Cost: None

Reclaim 8 unused LinkedIn Recruiter seats

Fix

Seats are billed whether or not anyone logs in.

Impact: highEffort: low

Cost: None

Next

30 to 90 days

Metaview to Bullhorn auto-sync across all desks

Connect

Once notes land in the ATS, your reporting stops depending on memory.

Impact: highEffort: medium

Cost: Not known

Later

Beyond 90 days

Automated weekly KPI and leakage reporting

Buy

Worth doing after the data is clean, not before.

Impact: mediumEffort: medium

Cost: Not known

Decisions

Seven possible calls: keep, kill, fix, connect, build, buy, or do nothing. Each one is tied to what you told us.

Meeting intelligence

Cancel Fireflies, you are paying twice for notetaking

Kill

You listed Fireflies and Metaview, and Zoom AI Companion is already switched on. Three tools, one job.

Removes a line item nobody defends in a renewal conversation.

$2,880/ year est.

8 seats x est. $30/mo x 12

Impact: mediumEffort: lowConfidence: high

Assumptions

  • · Seat count taken from your recruiter headcount, not an invoice.

ATS

Keep Bullhorn, fix adoption before anything else

Fix

You rated Bullhorn adoption low but spend is high. Replacing it now would repeat the same problem on a new invoice.

Impact: highEffort: mediumConfidence: medium

Data flow

Wire Metaview notes back into Bullhorn

Connect

Interview notes live outside the ATS, so your reporting is only as good as what someone remembers to paste.

Impact: highEffort: lowConfidence: high

Sourcing

Leave sourcing tooling alone this quarter

Do nothing

SourceWhale is used daily and your response rates are not the constraint. Nothing here is worth the change cost.

Impact: lowEffort: lowConfidence: medium

What we do not know

  • ?Actual invoiced spend per tool, all figures are estimates from seat counts.
  • ?Contract renewal dates, which decide what you can actually cancel this quarter.
  • ?Whether low Bullhorn adoption is a training issue or a configuration issue.

Maturity Scores

< 50 50–69 70+

Overall

high · 100% of inputs
64

Stack

high · 100% of inputs
71

AI

high · 100% of inputs
42

Automation

high · 100% of inputs
38

Recruiter enablement

high · 100% of inputs
67

Client experience

high · 100% of inputs
58

Confidence and Limitations

Confidence is input coverage, not a guess. Low coverage means treat the score as a hypothesis.

Overall verdict

high confidence · 100%

16 of 16 inputs given.

  • ·The verdict is a point-in-time read on what you told us, not an audit of your invoices or system logs.

Stack

high confidence · 100%

7 of 7 inputs given.

  • ·Every input this rating needs was given. Judgement still rests on self-reported figures.

AI

high confidence · 100%

2 of 2 inputs given.

  • ·Every input this rating needs was given. Judgement still rests on self-reported figures.

Automation

high confidence · 100%

2 of 2 inputs given.

  • ·Every input this rating needs was given. Judgement still rests on self-reported figures.

Recruiter enablement

high confidence · 100%

4 of 4 inputs given.

  • ·Every input this rating needs was given. Judgement still rests on self-reported figures.

Client experience

high confidence · 100%

3 of 3 inputs given.

  • ·Every input this rating needs was given. Judgement still rests on self-reported figures.

Applies to every figure here

  • ·Spend is captured in bands, not exact invoice values, so savings figures are ranges rounded conservatively.
  • ·Adoption is self-reported by you, not measured from licence or login data.
  • ·Vendor comparisons use public information and can go stale as products change.
  • ·Nothing here is checked against your ATS data, so anything you did not mention is not counted.

Evidence

working risk context

Every rating below is traced to what you told us. Nothing here is inferred.

Stack71

Systems of record, overlap across categories, and what each one costs.

  • ATS / CRM: Bullhorn

    $5–25k/mo · most of team

  • Sourcing: LinkedIn Recruiter, SourceWhale, Apollo

    $5–25k/mo · some

  • Meeting intelligence: Fireflies, Metaview

    <$1k/mo · few power users

  • Calling / VoIP: Nothing in use (told us so)

  • Website: Shazamme

    <$1k/mo · most of team

  • Headcount: 34

  • Revenue band: $5M – $15M

AI42

AI tools actually in use, how widely, and how much change the team can absorb.

  • AI tools: ChatGPT, Copilot

    <$1k/mo · few power users

  • AI ambition: Some shadow use, a couple of new tools/workflows

Automation38

Automation platforms in place against the admin load they should be removing.

  • Automation platforms: Nothing in use (told us so)

  • Admin load: 41% of a recruiter's week

Recruiter enablement67

Where recruiter time goes, and whether the system of record is adopted.

  • Admin load: 41% of a recruiter's week

  • Pains named: Recruiters drowning in admin, Tool sprawl and overlapping spend, Clients ghosting after submission

  • Biggest bottleneck: Recruiters spend half their day reformatting CVs and chasing interview feedback instead of selling.

  • ATS adoption: Bullhorn

    $5–25k/mo · most of team

Client experience58

How candidates get presented, how BD runs, and where deals fall over.

  • Submissions: PDF/Word + email

    most of team

  • BD outreach: Apollo, Lemlist

    <$1k/mo · some

  • Deals fall over at: Clients don't engage with submissions

Detected spend signals

  • ATS / CRM: $5–25k/mo, most of team.

  • Sourcing: 3 tools in one category at $5–25k/mo, overlap likely.

  • Meeting intelligence: <$1k/mo with adoption at "Few power users", spend without use.

  • BD outreach: <$1k/mo, some.

  • Automation: Nothing in use, declared gap.

  • AI tools: <$1k/mo with adoption at "Few power users", spend without use.

  • Calling / VoIP: Nothing in use, declared gap.

  • Website: <$1k/mo, most of team.

Stack Map

ATS / CRM

healthy
Bullhorn

Strong adoption.

Sourcing

overlap
LinkedIn RecruiterSourceWhaleApollo

Three tools, overlapping contact data.

Meeting Intelligence

overlap
MetaviewFirefliesZoom AI

Triple coverage. Consolidate to one.

BD Outreach

watch
ApolloLemlist

Sequencing not centralised.

Automation

gap
Zapier

Heavy manual CRM updates.

AI

watch
ChatGPTCopilot

No formal policy.

Where the saving comes from

  • →8 unused LinkedIn Recruiter seats
  • →Duplicate meeting AI subscriptions
  • →Overlapping contact data tools
  • →Underused Outreach sequences (low adoption)

Duplication Alerts

Overlapping tools where consolidating cuts spend without losing capability.

Triple meeting intelligence coverage

high impact

Monthly saving

$1,450/mo

MetaviewFirefliesZoom AI

Recommendation

Standardise on Metaview for recruiter interviews; switch off Fireflies seats and disable Zoom AI Companion where unused.

Overlapping contact databases

medium impact

Monthly saving

$900/mo

ApolloSourceWhaleZoomInfo trial

Recommendation

Choose Apollo as the contact source of truth and reposition SourceWhale around recruiter outreach automation only.

✨

AI Opportunities

Auto-generated candidate submissions

high impact

Generate first-pass candidate write-ups from CV + interview notes, cutting submission prep by ~40 minutes per candidate.

AI-assisted BD meeting prep

high impact

Structured pre-meeting briefs combining LinkedIn, news and prior conversations, produced automatically before each call.

Job ad rewriting copilot

medium impact

Standardise job ad tone, inclusivity and SEO using a tuned model trained on top-performing ads in your verticals.

⚙

Automation Opportunities

Auto-sync interview notes to Bullhorn

high impact

Pipe Metaview transcripts and AI summaries directly into the candidate record, eliminating manual recruiter admin.

Candidate stage movement triggers

high impact

Trigger client comms, internal notifications and task creation automatically on stage transitions in Bullhorn.

Weekly KPI rollups

medium impact

Replace manual Monday reporting with a Zapier + Looker Studio pipeline pulling from Bullhorn and Apollo.

You already pay for this

Use what is already in the stack before buying anything new.

Interview notes and call summaries

Metaview

Already licensed across two desks. Roll it out wider rather than buying a third notetaker.

Basic reporting

Looker Studio

Connect it to Bullhorn properly before paying for a BI layer.

Recommended Upgrades

Four picks chosen for Stratton Partners (Sample) from your answers, one each for AI, automation, sourcing and the back office.

Meeting Intelligence

Metaview

Purpose-built for recruitment; structured outputs flow cleanly into ATS.

Picked for Stratton Partners (Sample)

Because you flagged Fireflies + Zoom AI Companion duplication and want notes back in Bullhorn.

We only share what you enter. Privacy.

Outreach Automation

SourceWhale

Strongest recruiter-specific sequencing layer with ATS integrations.

Picked for Stratton Partners (Sample)

Because your BD sequencing lives in inboxes today and Bullhorn adoption is only 60%.

We only share what you enter. Privacy.

Candidate Submissions

Floats

Modern submission format that materially improves client conversion.

Picked for Stratton Partners (Sample)

Because your submission-to-interview conversion is the metric you flagged as weakest.

We only share what you enter. Privacy.

Workflow Automation

Zapier

Lightweight glue between Bullhorn, Apollo and Looker Studio, replaces the Monday-morning manual reporting.

Picked for Stratton Partners (Sample)

Because you spend ~3 hours every Monday rebuilding the same KPI deck by hand.

We only share what you enter. Privacy.

Do you need Floats?

Not right now

You are not losing deals on candidate presentation, you are losing them on speed of submission. Fix the Bullhorn to Metaview gap first. Floats is not the answer to this quarter's problem.

RecruitAudit is built by the team behind Floats. We say when it is not the answer.

Roadmap

A staged plan, quick wins first, compounding gains later.

30

30 days

Quick wins

  • →Cancel Fireflies + disable Zoom AI Companion on recruiter accounts
  • →Audit and reclaim 8 unused LinkedIn Recruiter seats
  • →Publish a one-page AI usage policy
90

90 days

Consolidation

  • →Roll out Metaview → Bullhorn auto-sync across all desks
  • →Pilot AI-assisted candidate submissions on two desks
  • →Standardise BD sequencing in SourceWhale
365

365 days

Compounding

  • →Recruiter-level AI copilots embedded in the daily workflow
  • →Automated weekly KPI + leakage reporting
  • →Quarterly tech audit cadence with leadership

Next step

Talk to an advisor, unlock discounts & a build plan

Get help negotiating vendor pricing from this report and a guided walkthrough of how to implement the 30 / 90 / 365-day roadmap with your team.

← Edit answersGenerated by RecruitAudit