Automation that does the job, not the reminders
Recruiting automation usually means a rules engine: if stage changes, send template four. It saves clicks and creates a second job maintaining the rules. I take the underlying work instead, and you decide per task whether I run it or ask first.
$100 of credits on us. No card required.
Describe the job in a message
Every Monday, check open roles against past finalists and draft outreach to anyone worth a second look.
'%20fill='%23FCFCFC'/%3e%3cellipse%20cx='304.949'%20cy='107.231'%20rx='43.7363'%20ry='86.7747'%20transform='rotate(-12.9533%20304.949%20107.231)'%20fill='%23FCFCFC'/%3e%3cellipse%20cx='207.296'%20cy='107.321'%20rx='33.7301'%20ry='67.712'%20transform='rotate(-12.2177%20207.296%20107.321)'%20fill='%23121212'/%3e%3cellipse%20cx='301.354'%20cy='103.848'%20rx='31.5494'%20ry='64.0532'%20transform='rotate(-12.2177%20301.354%20103.848)'%20fill='%23121212'/%3e%3c/svg%3e)
23 people worth a messageIt becomes a habit
I run it on schedule, in the channel, and show what I did. No rule builder, no admin panel, no configuration to keep correct.
You choose the leash
Autopilot for internal work, ask approval for anything a candidate sees. Set per habit, changed with a message.
23 people worth a messageThis is what lands in your channel
Not a dashboard to check. A result you can act on, with the evidence attached, sitting right where you already work.
The four jobs teams hand me first
Standing sourcing
A role stays open, so the search stays running. New people matching the brief arrive in the channel as they appear, not when someone remembers to re-run a query.
Follow up nobody enjoys
Second touches, take home reminders, hiring managers who have not left feedback. I chase on a schedule and stop when someone replies.
Interview coordination
Panels booked around real availability, reschedules absorbed, invites sent, stages moved. The scheduling page covers the whole loop.
Record keeping
Every approved outcome written back to the ATS with the source and the evidence, so reporting stays honest without evening data entry.
The reason most recruiting automation quietly stops being used is that keeping it correct costs more than the clicks it saved.
Taste, not another search box
Search is the easy half. The hard half is knowing which nine of two hundred people are worth your Tuesday, and saying why.
No second tool to check. The shortlist, the debate and the decision live in the channel your team already argues in.
I write the message under your name. You read it, edit it, send it. Where a habit runs on its own you pick Autopilot or Ask approval.
Day three, day seven, the nudge to a hiring manager who has gone quiet. I keep the rhythm you would keep on a good week.
Notes, stages and rejections land back in the ATS you already pay for. I do not ask you to migrate anything.
What automation usually gets wrong
Will it message candidates without us?
Not unless you turn that on for a specific habit. The default for anything leaving your company is that a human approves and sends it.
What happens when something unexpected comes up?
I stop and ask in the channel. A rules engine fails silently, which is why nobody trusts one after a quarter.
Does it work with our ATS automation?
Yes. Keep your triggers. I do the work around them and write approved outcomes back, so your existing rules keep firing on real events.
The difference in one table
| Rules based automation | Laidback | |
|---|---|---|
| What it automates | Notifications, templates, stage triggers | Sourcing, drafting, scheduling, follow up, record keeping |
| Setup | Building and maintaining rules | A sentence in a channel: do this, every Monday |
| When something is unusual | The rule does not fire and nobody notices | I flag it in the channel and ask |
| Control | On or off | Autopilot or ask approval, set per habit |
| Where you manage it | An admin panel | The same thread as the rest of the work |
Pick the chore you hate most
Tell me what it is and how often. That is the whole setup.