Recruiting

Vantage 360Recruiting automation case study

AI screening system that reads applications, scores them against role criteria, and escalates only the cases that need a human.

60%
Faster filtering
40%
Lower support load
Hiring accuracy

Why screening breaks rules-based automation

High-volume candidate screening is the textbook case for AI automation, and the textbook case for why keyword filters fail at it. A CV is unstructured. The same experience gets described five different ways. Filter on keywords and you reject strong candidates who used the wrong noun. Loosen the filter and you are back to reading everything by hand.

So most teams end up doing both: a crude filter that removes the obvious no, and a human reading whatever survives. The filter creates false negatives nobody ever sees. The human creates a bottleneck everybody feels.

What we built

An agent that reads each application in full, evaluates it against the criteria for that specific role, and produces a score with the reasoning attached. Not a keyword match. An assessment, with an explanation a hiring manager can argue with.

  • Extraction: unstructured CVs and applications parsed into a consistent structure.
  • Evaluation: scored against role-specific criteria, not a global keyword list.
  • Reasoning: every score carries the justification that produced it.
  • Escalation: low-confidence and borderline cases routed to a human rather than decided.
  • Audit trail: every decision logged, so a rejection can be explained months later.

The part that mattered most was not the scoring

It was the escalation. A screening system that confidently rejects the wrong person is worse than no system at all, because the failure is invisible. Nobody ever finds out about the good candidate who was filtered out.

So we built it to know when it is uncertain and hand over rather than guess. That is what made it trustworthy enough to actually deploy on real hiring decisions.

The audit trail exists for the same reason. Hiring decisions have to be defensible, sometimes long after the fact. An agent that cannot explain itself cannot be used for this, no matter how accurate it is.

The stack

React for the reviewer interface, Express and MongoDB for the pipeline and decision log, OpenAI for extraction and evaluation. Deliberately unexotic. The difficulty here was in the guardrails and the escalation logic, not in the model.

Results

Filtering time down 60%. Support load down 40%. Hiring accuracy doubled.

Next case study

Proxfy

AI-enabled POS platform where inventory decisions run off live sales data instead of stale spreadsheet exports.

Read it →

Have a process like this?

Book a free automation audit. We map your workflow, name the highest-leverage automation, and quote it in AUD.

  • Free 30-min audit
  • Fixed scope in AUD
  • Week-2 working build
Week 1Process mappingWe watch how the work actually happens, not how the doc says it does.
Week 2First working buildA live automation handling real data. Not a demo, not slides.
Week 6–8In productionError handling, alerting, runbooks. Handed over, documented, yours.