The Recruiter
Intake System

Role type is the first routing decision in this system. Executive searches trigger a different candidate pool, sourcing strategy, and qualification framework than individual contributor or technical placements. Your answer determines which scoring weights apply to every question that follows.

The history of this role is the most honest signal we have about what the client actually needs — and what to screen for before we introduce a single candidate. Roles with turnover patterns require fundamentally different sourcing and screening than new or backfilled positions. Answer this one honestly — it affects how aggressively we pre-qualify candidates on cultural and motivational fit.

Compensation reality is one of the top three reasons placements fail — not because candidates don't exist, but because the posted range doesn't match the client's actual offer threshold. This score uses your stated range to assess candidate availability and whether the market can support this search. Wishful compensation ranges produce lower placement scores — and failed searches.

Timeline is one of the three strongest predictors of whether this search closes — or stalls. Searches with defined urgency receive different sourcing intensity than open-ended requests. Immediate and 30-day searches trigger active pipeline outreach today. Flexible timelines receive a structured delivery schedule with regular updates. Either way, a defined timeline is better than none.

Culture is the most common reason technically qualified candidates fail within their first 90 days — not skills. Your honest answer here determines what personality and work-style filters we apply to the candidate pool. We use this to screen for actual cultural alignment, not credentials. The worst answer here is the one that mirrors the careers page rather than day-to-day reality.

The primary rejection reason from prior searches tells us exactly where to focus pre-screening. If skills gaps killed the last three candidates, we add technical benchmarks to the intake. If compensation was the issue, we anchor candidates on comp before the first interview. This question saves 10–15 hours of sourcing time by telling us where to screen hardest.

Decision complexity is a major weight in your placement readiness score. Every additional approver is a potential blocking point. Searches with a single decision-maker close 3x faster than committee-driven processes — and are worth significantly more of our proactive sourcing effort. Committee searches are not un-workable, but we structure them differently to prevent candidate loss during delays.

The single non-negotiable requirement is what we build the candidate filter around. Everything else is a preference. Once you tell us the one thing that ends the conversation if it's missing, we can eliminate candidates from the pipeline before they consume interview time. This question typically saves 3–5 presentations per search.

Prior public postings affect your candidate pool quality in a specific way. Roles posted 90+ days have been seen by most active candidates in the market — meaning the pool left is largely passive, not active. That changes our sourcing approach entirely. Roles brought to us directly before public posting give us first access to the widest available pipeline, which is reflected in your score.

Offer readiness is the final and often most predictive factor in whether a search closes. The top candidates you want are typically employed, interviewing with 2–3 other companies simultaneously, and will not wait 3 weeks for an internal approval process. Client offer speed is a hard constraint on candidate quality. Your answer here is factored directly into your placement readiness tier.