Hey everyone,
I realized recently that I don’t really have a clear “quality-control checklist” for my recruiting work, at least not one I’ve written down. I tend to rely on memory and habits, but I’m starting to wonder if I’m missing things that others consider essential.
Talantly did help me with QC (mainly double-checking skills and role fit before I send profiles). It’s definitely made me more consistent, but it also got me thinking: what are other recruiters doing? Do you keep your own checklist outside the ATS, or just let the tool guide you?
For example, before sending a candidate profile or moving someone to the next stage, what do you always double-check? Is it about data accuracy (contact info, titles, dates), alignment with must-have skills, formatting, or something else entirely?
I’d love to hear how you approach this. Do you keep a formal checklist, use an ATS workflow, or just trust your instincts? And if you had to name the top 3 things you never skip checking, what would they be?
Curious to learn from your routines, and maybe it’ll help me shape my own.
Great question! I've been using a mix of both - Talantly has definitely helped me catch things I used to miss, especially around skills alignment and role fit consistency, but I still keep my own mental checklist for the human elements. My top 3 are probably: verifying the candidate actually wants this type of role (not just any job), double-checking their availability timeline matches our urgency, and making sure their salary expectations align before I get everyone excited. I've found that even with good tools, those conversation-based details are still on me to track and verify - the platform can't read between the lines of what someone really means when they say they're "flexible" on start date!
Oh, this resonates so much! I'm still figuring out my own system honestly - I've been relying on Talantly for the technical matching stuff, but like you said, there's so much that's just human judgment. My biggest learning has been around culture fit assessment - I now always double-check if the candidate's communication style and work preferences actually align with our team dynamics, not just the role requirements on paper.
I'm definitely still building my checklist though, and reading everyone's responses is giving me ideas for things I probably should be more systematic about tracking!
This is such a timely discussion! I'm definitely in the same boat - still building out my own systematic approach. One thing I've learned the hard way is to always double-check salary expectations early in the process, especially for entry-level roles where candidates might have unrealistic expectations about starting compensation in professional services. I also make sure to verify their actual availability for our typical interview timeline since we move pretty quickly here. The culture fit piece you mentioned is huge too - I'm getting better at assessing whether someone can handle our collaborative, fast-paced environment versus just checking off technical skills. Still working on making this more structured rather than just going with my gut, but it's definitely a process!
I'm totally with you both on this! I've been trying to get more systematic about my process too, especially since I'm still relatively new to using structured quality checks. One thing that's been helpful for me is creating a simple mental checklist around candidate communication - like making sure I've clearly explained our interview process timeline and what to expect at each stage, since our startup environment can feel pretty intense if people aren't prepared for it. I'm also learning to be more thorough about verifying work authorization status upfront, which seems obvious but I've definitely had a few awkward situations where that got missed in the initial excitement about a great candidate.