Fractional Ops for recruiting & staffing agencies
Or your BD stalls whenever delivery gets busy. Or Monday's numbers can't be trusted. An agency is throttled by one thing at a time. Fulldesk inspects how yours actually runs - read-only, in the tools you already have - names the constraint, prices what it's costing you, and maps what to build first. Priced findings before any build.
I — THE DESK
Every agency runs an ATS, LinkedIn, phone lines, calendars, spreadsheets - and a dashboard somebody stopped trusting last quarter. The tools are fine. The gaps between them are where fees die, and the gaps come in two families.
II — STARVED
Not enough new work coming in.
Prospecting runs in bursts and stops the moment delivery gets busy. BD follow-up lives in one partner's head. Lists get built by hand once and never refreshed. The month ends, and the pipeline is whatever memory produced.
III — STALLED
Work leaking between winning it and filling it.
Roles go stale in silence while the dashboard stays green. Candidates finish interviews and wait. Clients go quiet, and nobody notices until the pipeline meeting. LinkedIn threads never reach the ATS, so the system of record is a system of some records. Run both an ATS and a CRM, and it doubles: two systems of record, neither complete.
IV — MEASURED
None of this is a discipline problem. It's a missing operating layer - and wherever it's missing most, that's the constraint. Guessing which family you're in is how agencies buy the wrong fix. So the first step here isn't a build. It's an inspection.
V — BUILT
A fixed-scope diagnostic that finds the constraint limiting your agency's output - before anything gets built. Read-only, in your own systems, with the findings priced in writing.
Your ATS and CRM, BD and outreach systems, dashboards, spreadsheets, and existing automations - through read-only access or exports - plus about ninety minutes of your team's time, split between you and one recruiter. Nothing writes to your systems during the review.
The Constraint Mapevery leak found and costed in fees and hours, and the one constraint throttling output, named.
The Build Mapfixes ranked by impact and effort, each with a fixed price. Buildable by me, or by your team if you'd rather.
The Method Notehow every number was measured, so you can re-run the checks without me.
A recorded readoutyou can replay it for your partners.
No deck. Bring your messiest workflow.
The review ends with a decision you own: build with me, with your own team, or not at all. Whatever the constraint turns out to be, the build installs monitored workflows around it - your existing tools, behaving like one operating system.
BD follow-up queue
Every open conversation surfaced daily, in front of whoever owns it.
Prospecting refresh
Lists rebuilt and re-verified on a schedule, without anyone touching a spreadsheet.
Stale-role watch
Searches with no submittals flagged before the client has to ask.
Activity capture
LinkedIn and email threads logged to the ATS without a recruiter touching it.
Reporting you can trust
The numbers rebuilt on schedule, with proof they refreshed.
Every workflow monitored and logged. If something breaks, you know before it costs you. Unwatched automation is just future technical debt.
The Control Review. Read-only, fixed scope, findings in writing.
$3,500–$5,000
Scoped from the findings. One constraint closed at a time, fixed price per module.
$7,500–$30,000
Monitoring, logs, and a monthly improvement. So it still works in March.
by arrangement
No. The build runs on the stack you already have - Loxo, Bullhorn, LinkedIn, the spreadsheets your team actually uses. Replacing a tool only ever shows up as a Build Map recommendation with the case attached; it's never the starting assumption. The problem is rarely the tools. It's the gaps between them.
The review costs your team about ninety minutes, total, and nothing writes to your systems. Builds ship the same way: one workflow at a time, monitored from day one, with your team's current habits left alone until the new workflow has proven itself in the logs. Nobody's desk gets reorganized mid-quarter.
That's the reason to inspect first. The obvious guess is recruiter admin - sometimes it's right. Just as often delivery is fine and the pipeline is starving, or the data can't support either answer yet. The review exists so the first build is aimed at the real constraint instead of the loudest symptom.
You own the Constraint Map and the Build Map either way - build with me, hand them to your own team, or sit on them. If we build together, the review fee comes off the first module and the work is mine personally: I take two engagements at a time, so nothing gets handed to a bench. The retainer only exists for systems that are already running.
I work in revenue operations in recruiting and staffing - inside the ATS mess, the follow-up that slips, the dashboards nobody trusts. I'm not a developer who learned business. I'm an operator who got tired of watching the same work leak, and learned to build the layer that catches it.
I take two engagements at a time. The first step is fixed-price and read-only - I'd rather prove it on your operation than claim it on this page.
- Brett Mammel
List the tools you run - you'll get three concrete observations back within two business days.
Real work inside a recruiting operation, sanitized the way I'd sanitize yours. The firm and the names come off; the numbers are exactly what happened.
6 hrs → 20 min
What used to eat most of a day now runs in about twenty minutes - with cleaner output at the end.
Top recruiter
3 days → 5 hrs
Same output, same desk, a fraction of the hours.
Account manager
One view
Where revenue is slipping shows up for the owner before it's lost, not after.
CEO
† Real client engagements. Company name, individual names, and any client-identifying detail removed at their request; the figures are unaltered.
The Control Review answers that in writing: read-only, fixed price, ten business days. Start with a call, or just send the list of tools you run.