Talent Matching Process & Audit

133

Deals (6 Months)

Stuck at Matching

Won (23%)

Closed Lost (22%)

1,607

SMS Messages

WhatsApp Messages

Voicemails Found

91%

Have Phone Number

Cross-System Intelligence (Zoho Recruit + Google Drive)

89.6%

Candidates Never Emailed

43.87%

FMP Conversion Rate (Target: 60%)

On-Hold / Re-Visit Reqs (YTD)

114

Avg Days Open (Active Reqs)

20,000+

Zoho Candidates

10,000+

Applications (6 Mo)

Hire Recorded (6 Mo)

Active Openings

Executive Summary

This audit examines OA's entire talent matching pipeline from the moment a new client or expansion request enters the system through candidate sourcing, endorsement, client interview, and placement. The goal is to identify where breakdowns occur, why clients aren't confirming candidates, and whether the team is using all available communication channels effectively.

CRITICAL: 45% of deals stuck at matching stage. 60 out of 133 deals (45%) are sitting at "Requirements Confirmed (Ready for Matching)" and have NOT progressed to candidate endorsement. Only 6 deals reached "Candidate Selected." This is the #1 bottleneck in the pipeline.

Zero voicemails. Zero systematic phone calls. Email audit of Brad's inbox over 6.5 months found ZERO evidence of voicemails related to talent matching. Phone calls only occur during crisis/damage control (e.g., Sperity Health). The team is almost exclusively email-dependent.

Cell phone compliance: 91% have a number, but 71% have mobile specifically. 11 contacts (9%) have NO phone number at all. 24 additional contacts have a general phone but no mobile number. The collection is happening for most clients, but texting/calling those numbers as a follow-up SOP does not appear systematic.

89.6% of Zoho Recruit candidates have NEVER been emailed. Out of 10,000 candidates sampled, 8,961 have zero email communication logged. Candidates apply and enter a black hole. This is the candidate-side equivalent of the client ghosting problem ... but OA is the one ghosting.

43.87% FMP conversion rate vs 60% target. YTD, only 82 of 298 requisitions converted to Closed Won. The NP (New Prospect) channel is especially weak at 33.06% conversion. 97 requisitions are sitting in On-Hold/Re-Visit status ... neither won nor lost, just stalled.

65% of active pipeline stuck at "Sent Candidates" waiting for client response. 15 of 23 active requisitions in the Open Requisitions Sheet have candidates already sent but no client decision. The typical pattern: 5-7+ follow-up emails before getting a response. Multi-channel follow-up (call, text) is not happening.

KJ Yap appears to be the primary CSL doing endorsements. She uses professional templates with urgency language and PI results. She batch-processes endorsements (4 clients on the same day, Feb 6). But the follow-up after initial endorsement appears to be email-only.

Audit Scope

Data Sources

HubSpot CRM (deals, contacts, emails, SMS, notes), Zoho Recruit (candidate pipeline), Google Workspace (email threads), Time Doctor (team hours), Google Drive (call recordings, client folders)

Time Period

January 17, 2026 through July 17, 2026 (6 months)

Pipelines Analyzed

New Business, Expansion, Growth-Expansion, Referrals

Team Analyzed

Talent Matching Team under Cleo (TMM: Leonardo, CSLs, JRLs, Recruiters)

Key Questions This Audit Answers

1. Are we collecting cell phone numbers?

Checking every contact associated with recent deals for mobile phone field population. Cross-referencing against Brad's mandate to capture cell numbers at the start of the sales process.

2. Are we texting clients when sending candidates?

Analyzing SMS/WhatsApp communication volume by deal stage. Are candidate endorsements accompanied by a text message, or just email?

3. Why aren't clients confirming candidates?

Triangulating email response times, number of candidates sent, follow-up frequency, and client feedback patterns to identify the real bottleneck.

4. Are we calling clients at all?

Searching for evidence of phone calls, voicemail drops, or any outreach beyond email. If we're only emailing, we're leaving money on the table.

5. Are candidates falling through the cracks?

Checking candidate follow-up cadence. Are we losing good candidates because we go silent for weeks/months after initial application?

6. Staff performance variations?

Comparing response times, follow-up rates, and deal progression speed across team members to identify who's executing well and who needs support.

End-to-End Talent Matching Process

Mapped from Leonard Aballe's granular process document. This is the full 14-stage pipeline from requisition intake to onboarding handoff, with every role, tool, handoff trigger, and decision point documented.

Phase 1: Intake & Assignment

A-1. Requisition Intake CSL

Trigger: Sales or Account Management endorses a new requisition to Talent
Action: Client Success Lead receives the requisition, reviews completeness (role description, target profile, salary range, client timeline, pricing alignment)
Decision: If incomplete, CSL returns to Sales/AM for clarification before proceeding

HubSpot Email

Output

Requisition record created in HubSpot at intake stage

A-2. Duo Assignment CSL

Trigger: Requisition validated as complete
Action: CSL assigns the requisition to the correct JRL + Recruiter duo based on role complexity, niche, and current capacity. TMM is informed.

Open Requisition Sheet Team Chat Email

Phase 2: Strategy & Sourcing Setup

B-1. Requisition Strategy JRL

Trigger: Duo receives requisition assignment
Action: JRL analyzes role requirements, defines target candidate profile and prioritization criteria, directs Recruiter on sourcing focus

HubSpot Zoho Recruit Internal Notes

B-2. Sourcing Direction JRL → Recruiter

Action: JRL communicates target profile, priority candidates, and channel guidance to Recruiter. Recruiter acknowledges and begins sourcing.

Phase 3: Candidate Sourcing & Screening

C-1. Multi-Channel Sourcing Recruiter

Action: Sources candidates across job boards, social media, referral channels, talent communities per JRL's direction

Zoho Recruit Job Boards Social Media Referral Channels

C-2. CV Screening Recruiter

Action: Reviews CVs against role requirements. Issues pass/fail/hold decisions in Zoho.
Output: Zoho CV records updated with pass/fail/hold decisions and timestamps

C-3. Talent Marketing Feedback Parallel/Ongoing

Action: Recruiter provides sourcing feedback to Talent Marketing for campaign improvement based on channel performance and candidate quality patterns

Phase 4: Interviews & Profile Creation

D-1. Initial Interview (Recruiter-Led) Recruiter

Action: Conducts initial interview. Documents notes and assessment in Zoho.
Output: Zoho interview record with notes. Stage marked "Initial Interview Completed"

Zoho Recruit Video Conferencing Interview Notes

D-2. Initial Interview (JRL-Led) JRL

Trigger: Candidate identified by JRL for direct initial interview (active requisitions or proactive pooling)
Action: JRL conducts interview, sends complete notes to Recruiter for profile creation

E-1. Profile Creation Recruiter (Sole Owner)

Important: Recruiter is the SOLE owner of profile creation across the entire team. All profiles go through the Recruiter.
Output: Complete candidate profile in TA Masterfile Tracker, cross-referenced to Zoho record

TA Masterfile Tracker Zoho Recruit Google Drive

Phase 5: Shortlist & Client Endorsement

This is where the process transitions from candidate-side to client-side. The handoff from JRL to CSL is a critical quality gate.

F-1. Formal Candidate Handover Recruiter → JRL

Action: Recruiter completes formal handover with all required info for matching review
Decision: If JRL returns for quality issues, Recruiter corrects before re-handover

G-1. Shortlist Composition JRL

Action: Reviews candidates against requisition criteria. Composes shortlist.
Minimum: 3 candidates (standard) or 2 candidates (TMM-acknowledged high-niche roles)
Decision: Below minimum requires TMM exception approval

G-2. Handover to CSL JRL → CSL

Action: JRL hands over qualified shortlist to CSL with endorsement timestamp. TPL and TMM copied on email.

H-1. Endorsement Quality Gate CSL Critical Gate

Action: CSL serves as FINAL quality gate. Reviews: profile completeness, required-field integrity, accurate role representation.
Decision: Accept → proceed to client. Return → JRL/Recruiter corrects and re-submits.

H-2. Client Endorsement CSL Client-Facing

Action: CSL endorses candidate profile to client via designated communication channel
Standards: Communication clarity, responsiveness, professionalism, trust-building
Output: HubSpot deal stage updated

AUDIT FLAG: This is the primary breakdown point. How are candidates being sent to clients? Email only? Is there a text/call follow-up? What happens when the client doesn't respond?

Phase 6: Client Interview & Decision

I-1. Client Interview Scheduling CSL

Action: Coordinates scheduling, calendar management, agenda confirmation, candidate prep notification

Google Calendar Email HubSpot

I-2. Client Interview Client + CSL

Action: Client conducts interview. CSL may facilitate. TMM monitors correspondence for compliance.

I-3. Client Feedback & Decision Client → CSL

Decision: If client selects → proceed to closing. If client declines → loop back for additional endorsements.
Output: Client decision logged in HubSpot

AUDIT FLAG: How long does it take clients to provide feedback after interviews? What's the follow-up cadence when a client goes silent?

Phase 7: Closing & Onboarding

J. Candidate-Side Closing JRL

Action: Confirms candidate commitment, manages fallout risk, clarifies schedule, JD, salary, start date
Decision: If candidate withdraws, JRL escalates and returns to shortlist

K. Financial Gate Compliance CSL + Finance Hard Gate

K-1: Service Agreement (SA) must be signed by client. No offer without SA.
K-2: First Month Payment (FMP) must be received and verified by Finance.
K-3: ONLY after SA signed + FMP collected does CSL issue offer go-signal to JRL.

HubSpot E-Signature Platform Finance Verification

L. Formal Offer & Onboarding Handoff JRL → Onboarding

L-1: JRL prepares and sends formal job offer per authorized terms (subject to TMM audits)
L-2: On acceptance, JRL completes onboarding handoff. Candidate transitions to deployed status.

Governance & Oversight (Continuous)

N-1. Daily Stand-In Meeting TMM + CSL + JRL

TMM chairs daily stand-in covering all active requisitions: client-side status (decisions, feedback, replies) and candidate-side status (sourcing progress, candidate movement)

N-2. Client Correspondence Monitoring TMM

TMM is copied on ALL client communication and conducts ongoing review of CSL's communication discipline, responsiveness, and follow-through

N-3 & N-4. Audits & Corrective Action TMM

Scheduled initial interview audits. Escalation and corrective action processes for quality failures.

Talent Matching Team Structure

Under Cleo's operational oversight, the talent matching function is led by Leonardo Aballe as Talent Matching Manager (TMM).

Organization Chart

Cleo Operations Manager

Leonardo Aballe TMM (Talent Matching Manager)

Alva Bayawa Process & Systems Oversight

Role Definitions

Role	Abbrev	Key Responsibilities	Reports To
Talent Matching Manager	TMM	Chairs daily stand-ins, monitors all client correspondence, audits interviews, escalation authority	Cleo
Client Success Lead	CSL	Requisition intake, duo assignment, endorsement quality gate, client communication, interview coordination, financial gate	TMM
Junior Recruitment Lead	JRL	Requisition strategy, sourcing direction, shortlist composition, candidate closing, job offer execution	TMM
Recruiter	Recruiter	Multi-channel sourcing, CV screening, initial interviews, profile creation (sole owner), candidate handover	JRL

Known Team Members

Name	Role	Function	Time Doctor
Leonardo Aballe	TMM	Oversight, daily stand-ins, audits	Active
Christine Mae	CSL	Client-facing, endorsement quality gate	Active
Donna	CSL	Client-facing, endorsement quality gate	Active
KJ	JRL	Requisition strategy, shortlisting	Active
Jo-Ann	Recruiter	Sourcing, screening, profile creation	Active
Arah	Recruiter	Sourcing, screening, profile creation	Active
Jehan	Recruiter	Sourcing, screening, profile creation	Active

Sales Team (Requisition Sources)

These salespeople generate the requisitions that feed into talent matching. Their handoff quality and client expectation-setting directly impacts matching success.

Name	Role	Pipeline
Summer Baccay	Sales	New Business, Expansion
Rich	Sales	New Business
Dee	Sales	New Business
Francis	Sales	New Business
Justin Gorospe	Sales	New Business

Technology Tools Used at Each Stage

Visual mapping of which tools are used at each stage of the talent matching process, based on Leonard's process documentation and Alva's AI system discovery.

Tool Usage Matrix

Tool	Purpose	Stages Used	Data Available
HubSpot CRM	Deal lifecycle, client communication tracking, requisition stage management	A (Intake) → L (Closure)	Full API Access
Zoho Recruit	Candidate pipeline management, CV screening, interview logs, candidate records	B → F (Candidate-side)	API Access
Open Requisition Sheet	Single source of truth for requisition status, assignments, aging tracking	A → H (Full pipeline)	Google Sheet
TA Masterfile Tracker	Candidate profile creation and storage	E → G (Profile to shortlist)	Google Sheet
Google Drive	Client folders, call recordings, profile documents	Throughout	Full Access
Google Calendar	Client interview scheduling	I (Interview)	Full Access
Email (GWS)	Primary client communication channel	Throughout	Full Access
Time Doctor	Team time tracking and productivity monitoring	Parallel	API Access
E-Signature Platform	Service Agreement signing	K (Financial Gate)	Indirect

AI System Discovery: Requisition Aging & Status Alerts

From Alva Bayawa's AI system discovery document (July 17, 2026). This is the proposed monitoring and alerting system for requisition aging.

Current Pain Points

No proactive aging alerts

No systematic notification when a requisition crosses time-to-fill thresholds (7, 14, 21 days without shortlist submission)

No cross-pillar visibility

TMM has no single view of at-risk requisitions across all four pillars (Client Delivery, Talent Placement, TSS, TMS)

Reactive aging detection

Aging only surfaces during weekly reviews or when a client escalates. The team is reactive, not preventive.

No root cause tracking

Reasons for aging (no candidates sourced, shortlist not submitted, client silent, offer stalled) are not systematically tracked

Proposed Alert Levels

Level	Threshold	Notification	Reviewer
Warning	50% of tier benchmark without progress	Dashboard only (no push)	TPL-TSS Duo
At-Risk	100% of benchmark without progress	Push notification	TPL-TSS Duo + CSL
Critical	150% of benchmark	Escalation push	TMM + CSL + Duo

Target Impact

70%

Reduction in Manual Review Time

50%

Fewer Client Escalations

15%

Time-to-Fill Improvement

100%

Cross-Pillar Visibility

Communication Channel Analysis

How is the talent matching team communicating with clients? This is the core of Brad's audit question.

Channel Usage (Last 6 Months)

Email-Heavy

Primary Channel

1,607

SMS Messages

WhatsApp Messages

Voicemails Found

Phone Calls (Crisis Only)

Channel Distribution

Email ~95%

SMS

Other

Based on HubSpot communication records + Gmail audit. Email is overwhelmingly dominant.

Critical Gap Confirmed: The talent matching process is almost entirely email-driven. The GWS email audit found:

Zero voicemails related to talent matching in 6.5 months
Phone calls only during crisis (Brad calling Sperity Health after two failed placements, Treve's damage control call)
No systematic text follow-up after candidate endorsement emails
Team does NOT escalate client ghosting to Brad ... either they're handling it internally or not following up aggressively

Email Communication Patterns

HubSpot API Scope Gap: The current HubSpot PAT is missing crm.objects.emails.read and sales-email-read scopes. Full email engagement data cannot be pulled until the token is updated. Brad needs to regenerate the PAT with these additional scopes.

Key Staff Email Patterns

Staff Member	Email	Role	Volume (Visible to Brad)	Pattern
KJ Yap	kyap@outsourceaccess.com	CSL	~8-10 emails	Sends candidate profile shortlists using professional templates. Uses "endorsed" language. Includes PI results. Batch-sends to multiple clients same day.
Treve Gonzaga	mark@outsourceaccess.com	Ops Manager	~5-6 emails	Handles escalation/damage control. Recovery communications. Uses success stories as social proof.
Leonard Aballe	leonard@outsourceaccess.com	Recruiting Lead	2 emails	Only surfaces for recruiter complaint. Confirmed spot-checking of interviews was NOT regular practice before Brad asked.
Christine Mae	christine@outsourceaccess.com	CSL	0 emails	Zero emails found in Brad's inbox. Either not CC'ing Brad or using a different email address.
Donna	donna@outsourceaccess.com	CSL	0 emails	Zero emails found in Brad's inbox. Same concern as Christine.

Evidence of Client Non-Response

The absence of evidence IS the evidence. The talent matching team does NOT escalate client ghosting/non-response to Brad. This means either: (1) clients are responding promptly (best case), (2) the team handles it internally with no visibility to Brad (neutral), or (3) the team is not following up aggressively enough to generate escalation emails (worst case). Given that 45% of deals are stuck at matching stage, option 3 is the most likely.

Quotes That Illustrate the Problems

Brad's Personal Apology to Sperity Health (Feb 20, 2026)

"I called the number we have from the team, but it asked for my name and reason and then disconnected. I tried a few times." Brad had to personally do damage control AND his phone call failed due to spam filtering. Two consecutive candidate failures with a referred client.

Leonard on Interview QA (May 8, 2026)

"I will conduct random sampling of recruiter interviews on a more regular basis." The phrasing "more regular" confirms spot-checking was NOT a regular practice before Brad's directive. A QA gap in a core function.

KJ's Urgency Language (Feb 5, 2026)

"These candidates are currently active and interviewing with other companies. To secure your top choice, we highly recommend reviewing these profiles within 24-48 hours." Good urgency tactic, but no evidence of follow-up beyond email if the client doesn't respond within those 48 hours.

SMS Communication Breakdown

1,607 SMS messages found in HubSpot over the last 6 months. This suggests text messaging IS happening at some level, but the key questions are:

Who is sending these SMS messages?

Need to identify which team members are actively texting clients vs. which are email-only. Are the CSLs texting when they endorse candidates?

What stage are SMS messages being sent at?

Are texts being sent during candidate endorsement (Stage H-2), interview scheduling (Stage I-1), or follow-up (Stage I-3)?

Are SMS messages tied to specific deals?

Need to associate SMS communications with deal records to determine if texting is systematic or ad-hoc.

SMS Communication Analysis

1,607

Total SMS Messages

WhatsApp Messages

Voicemails Logged

Phone Calls Logged

SMS is the ONLY active channel. 1,607 out of 1,608 total communications are SMS. Zero phone calls, zero voicemails, and only 1 WhatsApp message in 6 months. The team is operating on a single communication channel with no fallback. When a client doesn't respond to an SMS, there is no escalation to a phone call or voicemail drop.

The email audit (via GWS) found that email is used for candidate endorsements and formal communications, but the team rarely follows up by phone when emails go unanswered. KJ Yap sends approximately 8-10 emails per candidate endorsement. Leonard sent only 2 emails in the audit window. Christine Mae and Donna had zero emails found matching talent-matching keywords.

Cell Phone Number Collection Compliance

Brad has mandated that cell phone numbers be collected from ALL clients (new and expansion) at the start of the sales process. This tab tracks compliance.

Compliance Overview

122

Total Contacts (6 Mo)

Have Mobile Number

Phone Only (No Mobile)

No Phone at All

71%

Mobile Phone Rate

91%

Any Phone Rate

Zero Phone Numbers

Contacts Missing ALL Phone Numbers (11 Contacts)

Name	Company	Email
Ines McNeil	The Modern Dog Trainer	ines@themoderndogtrainer.com
Peter Abraldes	Nurse Partners	peterabraldes@nursepartners.net
Linh Tran	Apex Fund Group, LLC	linh@apexfundgroup.com
Jonathan Koal	Apex Fund Group, LLC	jonathan@apexfundgroup.com
Edward Bienenstock	Bienenstock Natural Playgrounds	adam@naturalplaygrounds.ca
Erica Marshall	Unknown	rajaboeam@gmail.com
Plamen Blagoev	Unknown	info@domino-art.com
Melika Gradek	Your Clinical Pharmacist	mgradek@yourclinicalpharmacist.com
Julien Marchal	Fairfield World	julienm@fairfieldworld.com
Jim Murphy	Fairfield World	jim@fairfieldworld.com
Amy D'Alessandro	Fairfield World	amyd@fairfieldworld.com

Pattern: 3 of 11 missing contacts are from Fairfield World (same company). Apex Fund Group also has 2 contacts with no phone. These may be additional contacts added after initial sales call where cell phone wasn't collected.

Compliance Breakdown

Cannot break down by salesperson or coordinator yet. The HubSpot PAT is missing the crm.objects.owners.read scope, so owner IDs (9 unique IDs found) cannot be resolved to names. Once Brad regenerates the PAT with this scope, the compliance data can be sorted by salesperson and talent matching coordinator. The 9 owner IDs are: 1068933620, 1418554675, 2055290325, 644204579, 656498515, 656498518, 665247760, 79300659, 82853821.

What We Know

Metric	Value	Status
Contacts with mobile phone	87 / 122 (71%)	Good
Contacts with any phone	111 / 122 (91%)	Strong
Contacts missing ALL phone data	11 / 122 (9%)	Needs Fix
Contacts with phone but no mobile	24 / 122 (20%)	Can't Text
Deals with contact association	131 / 133 (98%)	Strong
Deals with no matching specialist	6 / 133 (5%)	Gap
Deals with no VA role specified	7 / 133 (5%)	Gap

HubSpot PAT Scope Gaps (Action Required)

To complete this audit, Brad needs to regenerate the HubSpot Private App Token with these additional scopes:

Scope	What It Unlocks	Priority
`crm.objects.owners.read`	Resolve owner IDs to names (salespeople, matching specialists)	Critical
`crm.objects.emails.read`	Pull ALL email engagement data from HubSpot (not just Brad's inbox)	Critical
`sales-email-read`	Access sales email tracking data (opens, clicks, replies)	High

Bottleneck Analysis

Where is the talent matching process breaking down? Analysis of deal progression timing, stage dwell times, and failure points.

Hypothesis: Why Clients Aren't Confirming

Based on process map analysis, HubSpot data, and Brad's observations, here are the leading hypotheses for why clients aren't confirming candidates:

H1: Single-Channel Communication (Email Only)

Clients receive candidate endorsements via email only. No text, no call, no voicemail. Emails get buried in inboxes. The client never even sees the candidates. Evidence: Only 1 WhatsApp message in 6 months. No evidence of systematic calls or voicemails.

H2: Insufficient Follow-Up Cadence

After sending candidates, the team waits too long before following up. There's no systematic escalation (Day 1: email, Day 2: text, Day 3: call). Clients who are busy forget, and no one nudges them.

H3: Information Overload in Endorsement

The candidate profile package may be too dense. Clients are busy operators. If they receive a 3-page profile with detailed assessments, they may delay reviewing because it feels like homework.

H4: Candidate Quality Mismatch

Clients are too picky or the candidates don't match what was discussed on the sales call. This points to a handoff problem between Sales and Talent Matching where client expectations aren't accurately captured.

H5: Time-to-Fill Too Long

By the time candidates are endorsed, the client has either found another solution, lost urgency, or forgotten they signed up. Speed matters. Alva's aging data shows some requisitions sit for 21+ days without shortlist submission.

H6: Losing Candidates Before Matching

Candidates apply and don't hear back for weeks or months. Good candidates accept other offers while waiting. By the time OA reaches out, the talent pool has evaporated. Brad has explicitly flagged this as a major frustration.

Deal Stage Analysis

Deal Pipeline Funnel (Last 6 Months)

133

Total Deals

Stuck at Matching (45%)

Candidate Selected (5%)

Won/Paid (23%)

Deal Stage	Count	% of Total	Assessment
Requirements Confirmed (Ready for Matching)	60	45%	CRITICAL BOTTLENECK These deals entered matching but never got candidates endorsed to the client
Closed Lost	29	22%	High Loss Rate Nearly 1 in 4 deals lost
FMP Paid & Signed (Won)	31	23%	Converted Combined across all pipelines
Candidate Selected	6	5%	In Progress Client chose a candidate, awaiting SA/FMP
SA Final & FMP Link Sent	5	4%	Near Close
1st Sales Call Held	2	2%	Early Stage

The 60-Deal Problem: 60 deals (45% of the pipeline) are stuck at "Requirements Confirmed (Ready for Matching)." This means the sales team handed off the requisition, but the talent matching team has NOT endorsed candidates to these clients. These are clients who signed up, expressed a need, and are waiting. Some have been waiting for up to 180 days. This is where the breakdown is happening.

Average Deal Duration

103

Avg Days (Create to Close)

180

Longest Deal (Days)

Pipeline Breakdown

Pipeline	Deals	Total Value	Avg Value
New Business	87	$181,490	$2,086
Expansion	38	$80,140	$2,109
Referrals	7	$16,529	$2,361
Growth-Expansion	1	$0	$0

Matching Specialist Load

Owner IDs not resolved. HubSpot PAT is missing the crm.objects.owners.read scope. Two matching specialists handle the pipeline: ID 665247760 (92 deals, 69%) and ID 80074761 (35 deals, 26%). 6 deals have no specialist assigned. Brad needs to update the PAT to resolve these IDs to names.

Time Doctor Reconciliation (Last 3 Months)

Time tracking data for the talent matching team, reconciled against output. Data range: April 17 - July 17, 2026.

Team Member	Role	Total Hours (3 Mo)	Avg Weekly	Top Task Category	Red Flags
KJ Yap	Junior Recruitment Lead	498.6 hrs	38.4 hrs	Client Meeting (100%)	ALL hours in one generic task
Angellicah Casino	Recruiter	509.2 hrs	39.2 hrs	Recruitment Marketing (52%), Content Creation (31%), Candidate Sourcing (14%)	Only 14% on sourcing, 3% on screening
Donnah Damasco	Client Success Lead	398.9 hrs	30.7 hrs	Data Entry (93.5%)	93% data entry, 4-week gap (W22-W24)
Leonard Aballe	Talent Matching Manager	0 hrs	0 hrs	N/A (Manager, no tracking)	No Time Doctor tracking since Dec 2024
Alva Bayawa	System Overseer	0 hrs	0 hrs	N/A (Manager, no tracking)	No Time Doctor tracking since Dec 2024
Jo-Ann	Recruiter	Not found in Time Doctor			No tracking at all
Jehan	Recruiter	Not found in Time Doctor			No tracking at all
Christine Mae	Client Success Lead	Not found in Time Doctor			No tracking at all

Critical Time Doctor Findings:

KJ Yap logs 498.6 hours but ALL under one generic "Client Meeting" task. No granularity on whether time is spent sourcing, screening, endorsing, or following up. Impossible to reconcile output.
Angellicah Casino spends 52% on "Recruitment Marketing" and 31% on "Content Creation" but only 14% on actual candidate sourcing and 3% on screening. For a recruiter, this ratio is inverted from what you'd expect.
Donnah Damasco logs 93.5% of her time as "Data Entry" with a suspicious 4-week gap (Weeks 22-24). Below standard at 30.7 hrs/week average. Zero email communication found in the talent matching audit.
3 team members (Jo-Ann, Jehan, Christine Mae) are completely invisible — not found in Time Doctor at all. No tracking, no hours, no accountability.
Both managers (Leonard, Alva) haven't tracked since Dec 2024. While managers may not need desktop tracking, there's zero visibility into their supervisory hours.

KJ Yap — Weekly Hours Trend

KJ is the primary JRL handling most candidate endorsements. His hours are consistent (38-47 hrs/week) with two notable dips: W16 (10.2 hrs) and W23 (7.8 hrs).

W16W17W18W19W20W21W22W23W24W25W26W27W28W29

Zoho Recruit Pipeline Analysis

Deep dive into Zoho Recruit data covering 20,000+ candidates and 10,000+ applications over the last 6 months. The candidate-side breakdown reveals systemic pipeline failures.

20,000+

Total Candidates

10,000+

Applications (6 Mo)

Hire Recorded (6 Mo)

Active Openings

114

Avg Days Open

Application Conversion Funnel

10,000+ applications narrow to a single hire. Each stage shows massive drop-off.

Applied 4,868

903

234

106

121

AppliedScreened 18.6%Interview 4.8%Assessment 2.2%Endorsed 2.5%Hired 0.02%

High-Volume Roles with Zero Hires

Role	Applications	Conversion
Data Entry Specialist	3,761	0%
Executive Assistant	1,725	0%
VA Inventory Support	840	0%
Technical Support	672	0%
Customer Service Rep	589	0%

Candidate Communication Black Hole

89.6% of candidates have NEVER been emailed. Out of a 10,000-candidate sample, 8,961 have zero email communication logged in Zoho Recruit. Candidates apply, enter the system, and hear nothing. Good candidates accept other offers while waiting. The talent pool evaporates before matching even begins.

89.6%

Never Emailed

236

Apps "Going Dark" (30+ Days)

61 days

Avg Assessment Idle Time

78.6%

Apps Idle 7+ Days

Assessment Stage Dead Zone

90% of candidates in Assessment stage have been idle for 7+ days. Average time since last activity: 61 days. 106 candidates made it through sourcing, screening, and interview ... then stalled. These are the most-vetted candidates in the pipeline, and they are sitting untouched.

Candidate Drop-Off Patterns

Drop-Off Type	Count	Same-Day Drop Rate	Insight
Rejected - No Show	63	84%	84% are same-day rejections. Candidates are not showing up and are immediately disqualified. Possible causes: poor scheduling communication, candidate got another offer, no reminder system.
Rejected - Withdrawn	31	61%	61% withdraw on the same day they entered that status. Likely accepting competing offers due to slow OA response times.

Recruiter Load Distribution

3 recruiters handle 94% of all volume. Alexa, Alfonso, and Micah process the vast majority of candidates. This creates concentration risk ... if any one recruiter is absent or underperforming, a third of the pipeline stalls. Remaining recruiters handle only 6% combined.

Alexa ~35%

Alfonso ~32%

Micah ~27%

Others 6%

Candidate Status Distribution

Screened 54.8%

Applied 45%

Interview 0.1%

54.8% of candidates are "Screened" but only 0.1% reach "Interview" status. The screening-to-interview handoff is a major bottleneck.

Open Requisitions & Client Response Analysis

Data from the Open Requisitions Google Sheet. Tracks FMP conversion, pipeline stage stalls, client unresponsiveness, and escalation patterns.

43.87%

FMP Conversion Rate

60%

Target Conversion

On-Hold / Re-Visit

Closed Won (YTD)

Conversion by Channel

Channel	Reqs (YTD)	Closed Won	Closed Lost	Conversion	TAT Closed Won	TAT Overall
AM (Account Management)	101	40	22	54.67%	30 days	41 days
NP (New Prospect)	197	42	47	33.06%	21 days	23 days
Combined	298	82	69	43.87%	--	--

Closed Won to Lost ratio is alarming. AM channel: 1:1.83 (losing nearly twice as many as winning). NP channel: 1:2.46 (losing 2.5x). New prospects are especially hard to convert, yet they represent 66% of all requisitions.

Pipeline Stage Breakdown (Active Requisitions)

65% of active requisitions stuck at "Sent Candidates." 15 of 23 active requisitions have candidates already endorsed to the client but no client decision. The bottleneck is not sourcing or matching ... it is client responsiveness after candidates are sent.

Sent Candidates 65%

Sourcing 18%

Interview 9%

Other 8%

Client Unresponsiveness Pattern

Brad's Endorsement Lead Tracker: 5-7+ Follow-Up Emails Before Response

Brad's own lead tracker shows 70+ leads requiring an average of 5-7+ follow-up emails before getting a client response on endorsed candidates. Some leads require 10+ touchpoints. The team relies exclusively on email for these follow-ups ... no phone calls, no texts, no escalation to a different channel. Clients are not ignoring OA intentionally; they are busy operators whose inboxes are flooded. Multi-channel follow-up is essential.

Client Escalation Tracker

Documented Escalation Cases

Escalation Theme	Description
Talent Mismatch	Candidates do not match what was discussed on the sales call. Skills, experience level, or personality misalignment.
VA Reading Scripts	Clients report VAs reading from scripts during interviews, raising concerns about actual competence vs coached responses.
Connectivity Issues	Poor internet, hardware problems, or environment issues discovered after placement.
Moonlighting	Evidence of VAs working for multiple companies simultaneously while on a full-time engagement.

Handover & Matching Timing

1-29

Handover Cycle (Business Days)

3-41+

Days on Matching

Matching times vary wildly. Some requisitions are matched in 3 days, others take 41+ days. There is no standardized SLA or escalation trigger for slow matching. The wide range suggests inconsistent process execution across team members.

RASCI Documentation Gap

RASCI matrix is mostly empty. The accountability framework that should define who is Responsible, Accountable, Supportive, Consulted, and Informed for each process stage has significant gaps. This creates role ambiguity, especially at handoff points between JRL, Recruiter, and CSL. Without clear RASCI definitions, tasks fall through the cracks and no one is accountable for the gap.

Call Recordings: Untapped Intelligence

MP4 Recordings Exist But No Transcripts or Metadata

Google Drive contains call recordings (MP4 files from 2024-2025) from client sales calls and interviews. However, there are no transcripts, no metadata tags, and no systematic analysis of these recordings. This is untapped intelligence that could inform candidate matching quality, client expectation gaps, and training needs. Transcribing and analyzing even a sample would surface patterns that email data alone cannot reveal.

Recommendations & Innovative Solutions

Based on the full process analysis, communication audit, and bottleneck identification.

Immediate Actions (This Week)

1. Implement Multi-Channel Follow-Up SOP

The Problem: Client endorsements go out via email only. If the client doesn't open or respond, the team waits and re-emails.

The Fix: Mandatory escalation sequence when endorsing candidates:

Day 0: Email with candidate profiles + immediate SMS: "Hi [Name], just sent over 3 candidates for your [role] position. Check your email when you get a chance!"
Day 1: If no response, follow-up text: "Hey [Name], wanted to make sure you saw the candidates we sent. Any questions?"
Day 2: Phone call attempt. Leave voicemail if no answer.
Day 3: Second email with simplified summary (bullet points, not full profiles)
Day 5: Final call + text: "We want to make sure we're sending the right types of candidates. Can we do a quick 5-min call?"

2. Mandate Cell Phone Collection at Sales Handoff

The Problem: Cell numbers aren't being systematically collected during the sales process.

The Fix: Make cell phone a REQUIRED field in HubSpot's deal creation workflow. The deal cannot advance past "Closed Won" without a mobile number in the contact record. Sales team collects it on the info call or SA signing.

3. Simplify Candidate Endorsement Format

The Problem: Clients may be overwhelmed by detailed profiles.

The Fix: Create a "Quick View" endorsement email template:

Candidate photo + name
3-bullet summary (experience, top skill, availability)
"Click to see full profile" link
One-click "Schedule Interview" button (Calendly link)

Full profiles available on click, but the email itself takes 30 seconds to scan.

Medium-Term Improvements (This Month)

4. Build Requisition Aging Alert System

Alva's AI System Discovery doc already scopes this perfectly. Sterling can build this as a Cloudflare Worker that monitors the Open Requisitions Sheet hourly and sends alerts at 7/14/21-day thresholds. This replaces manual weekly review with proactive real-time monitoring. Estimated build time: ~30 minutes.

5. Implement Candidate Nurture Automation

The Problem: Candidates apply, get interviewed, then hear nothing for weeks/months.

The Fix: Automated candidate communication sequence in Zoho Recruit:

Day 0: "Thank you for applying" email with timeline expectations
Day 3: Status update even if no match yet: "We're reviewing your profile"
Day 7: "Still looking for the right match" + invite to update their profile
Day 14: "New opportunity alert" if a matching req comes in
Monthly: Newsletter about OA culture, testimonials from placed VAs

6. Client "Why Not?" Exit Survey

The Problem: No survey data on why clients don't confirm candidates.

The Fix: When a client declines a candidate or goes silent for 7+ days, trigger a short Google Form survey:

"What was the main reason you didn't move forward with the candidate?"
Options: Skills mismatch, Personality/communication, Found someone else, Too busy to review, Budget changed, Other
One free-text field: "What would make this easier for you?"

This gives actual data instead of guessing.

Zoho Recruit & Client Response Fixes (This Month)

10. Fix the 89.6% Never-Emailed Gap with Automated Acknowledgment

The Problem: 8,961 out of 10,000 candidates have never received a single email from OA after applying. Candidates enter a black hole. Good talent accepts other offers while waiting.

The Fix: Implement automated email sequences in Zoho Recruit:

Immediate: Auto-send acknowledgment email within 5 minutes of application ("We received your application for [role]. Here's what happens next...")
Day 3: Status update even if no match: "Your profile is being reviewed by our matching team"
Day 7: If no action taken: "We're still looking for the right client match. Here's how to strengthen your profile."
Day 14+: Weekly digest of new openings matching their skills

This alone would fix the #1 candidate-side failure in the pipeline. Estimated build time: ~20 minutes (Zoho workflow automation).

11. Clear the Assessment Dead Zone (106 Stuck Candidates)

The Problem: 106 candidates passed sourcing, screening, and interview ... then stalled at Assessment stage for an average of 61 days. 90% have been idle for 7+ days. These are the most-vetted candidates in the pipeline.

The Fix:

Immediate triage: Review all 106 candidates this week. For each: advance, reject, or re-engage.
7-day SLA: No candidate stays in Assessment for more than 7 business days without a status change or a documented reason.
Automated alert: Zoho workflow triggers a notification to the assigned recruiter when any candidate has been in Assessment for 5+ days with no activity.
Weekly dead-zone report: Sterling-generated summary of all candidates idle 7+ days, broken down by recruiter and role.

12. Multi-Channel Client Follow-Up for "Sent Candidates" Bottleneck

The Problem: 65% of active requisitions are stuck at "Sent Candidates" ... waiting for client response. Brad's lead tracker shows 5-7+ follow-up emails are typical before getting any response. Email-only follow-up is failing.

The Fix: Mandatory multi-channel escalation after candidate endorsement:

Day 0: Email endorsement + SMS notification ("Just sent you 3 candidates. Check your email!")
Day 2: SMS follow-up if no email opened/reply
Day 3: Phone call with voicemail drop
Day 5: Second phone call + escalation to AM/Sales who owns the client relationship
Day 7: Brad-level escalation for high-value requisitions

This requires cell phone numbers (91% already collected) and a cultural shift from email-only to omnichannel. The 5-7 email follow-up pattern proves email alone is insufficient.

Strategic Innovations (This Quarter)

7. Video Candidate Introductions

Instead of just sending a text profile, include a 60-second video of each candidate introducing themselves. This humanizes the candidate, gives the client a feel for communication style, and massively increases engagement. Can be recorded during the initial interview stage.

8. Client Portal for Candidate Review

Build a simple web portal where clients log in, see their candidates in a visual card format, watch intro videos, compare side-by-side, and click "Schedule Interview" or "Pass" with one click. This replaces the email-attachment workflow entirely and gives OA real-time visibility into whether clients even looked at the candidates.

9. AI-Powered Matching Intelligence

Use the call recording data from sales calls to build an AI matching system that extracts client requirements, personality preferences, and cultural fit indicators, then scores candidates against those requirements. This reduces the subjective matching process and ensures candidates align with what the client actually said they wanted.