AI recruiting is not one product category. It is a stack of tools that touch sourcing, engagement, screening, scheduling, assessment, and analytics. Many vendors now span multiple layers, which makes demos look impressive and buying decisions harder.

This guide breaks the market into nine functional layers and gives you a practical method to build a shortlist. It is written for TA leaders, recruiting operations, and staffing teams that want measurable improvements without taking on unnecessary risk.

• Start with the bottleneck, not the vendor brand
• A modern stack is usually composable, most teams end up with 2 to 4 layers connected to the ATS
• The difference between a good pilot and a bad pilot is auditability, integration depth, and candidate experience at scale
• Voice AI is moving fast, but governance has not caught up in many products, especially around audits and bias controls

---

1. Identify your bottleneck
   Examples include low applicant volume, too many unqualified applicants, slow scheduling, high no show rates, inconsistent screening, or weak reporting
2. Pick the layer that directly addresses that bottleneck
3. Shortlist 2 to 4 vendors in that layer
4. Run a pilot that validates end to end workflow, including ATS write back and governance
5. Scale only after you can measure candidate completion, cycle time impact, and recruiter hours saved

Most teams get the best results when they treat AI as workflow infrastructure, not as a replacement for recruiting judgment. Structure and evidence matter.

---

1. Programmatic sourcing and job advertising
2. Talent intelligence and search
3. Talent CRM and nurture
4. Conversational engagement across chat and messaging
5. Voice and video interview platforms
6. Skills, coding, and simulation tests
7. Scheduling and workflow automation
8. Offer and onboarding automation
9. Analytics, compliance, and insights

These layers overlap. The goal is clarity when buying, not perfect taxonomy.

---

1) Layer deep dives

Each section below includes what the layer solves, who it is best for, what to validate, and common failure modes.

What it solves
Getting more qualified applicants for a given spend by optimizing where jobs are distributed and how budgets are allocated.

Best for
High volume employers, multi site operators, staffing firms, retail, logistics, healthcare support roles, and any team where applicant flow is the constraint.

Typical capabilities

• Distribution across job boards, aggregators, and performance channels
• Budget pacing and reallocation based on downstream signals
• Creative and job description testing at scale
• Reporting that maps spend to outcomes such as apply starts and qualified applies

What to validate

• The vendor definition of qualified apply and how it ties to your ATS stages
• Ability to exclude low quality sources quickly
• Controls for brand safety and compliance messaging
• Data export options for your analytics team

Common failure modes

• Optimizing for clicks or applies rather than qualified outcomes
• Over indexing on one channel that looks good in dashboards but produces low retention hires
• Weak attribution once candidates cross into the ATS

KPIs to track

• Cost per qualified apply
• Apply start to apply complete rate
• Offer acceptance rate by source
• 30 to 90 day retention by source for frontline roles

Common vendors to evaluate Appcast, PandoLogic, Joveo, Talroo, ZipRecruiter invite to apply workflows

---

What it solves
Finding the best candidates already in your systems, plus surfacing external prospects through enrichment and search. This layer is often the bridge between sourcing and recruiting operations.

Best for
Enterprise TA, internal mobility programs, staffing teams with large candidate databases, and any employer with a high volume ATS history that is under leveraged.

Typical capabilities

• Search across the ATS and CRM with skill inference
• Talent mapping and pipeline analytics
• Internal mobility and redeployment workflows
• Data normalization and profile enrichment

What to validate

• Data sources and refresh cadence
• Explainability of match scoring
• How results appear in recruiter workflow, not just in a separate portal
• Controls for fairness review and governance in ranking and recommendations

Common failure modes

• Good search, poor adoption because the tool lives outside recruiter habits
• Black box ranking that cannot be defended in an audit
• Duplicates and identity resolution issues across ATS and CRM instances

KPIs to track

• Rediscovered candidates contacted per recruiter per week
• Response rate on rediscovery campaigns
• Time to shortlist for hard to fill roles
• Quality of slate consistency across sites and recruiters

Common vendors to evaluate Eightfold AI, SeekOut, Tenzo AI, HiredScore, HireEZ, Gloat

---

What it solves
Keeping leads warm, segmenting audiences, and reactivating silver medalists. A strong CRM reduces sourcing pressure and improves hiring speed in recurring role families.

Best for
Teams with recurring hiring patterns, seasonal spikes, event pipelines, staffing agencies, and employers with high volumes of past applicants.

Typical capabilities

• Candidate segmentation and campaign orchestration
• Email and SMS nurture workflows with consent management
• Lead routing, recruiter assignment, and follow up automation
• Basic analytics on engagement and drop off

What to validate

• Consent and preferences management, especially for SMS
• Deliverability controls and domain reputation protection
• Suppression lists and guardrails that prevent over messaging
• Data hygiene and deduping

Common failure modes

• Outreach volume that harms deliverability
• Poor integration that forces recruiters to update multiple systems
• Inconsistent consent collection across channels

KPIs to track

• Response rate by segment
• Rediscovery conversion to screen
• Candidate satisfaction signals during nurture flows
• Recruiter time saved per requisition

Common vendors to evaluate Beamery, Phenom, Tenzo AI, Gem, Sense

---

What it solves
Answering candidate questions, collecting basic qualification info, reducing drop off, and moving candidates forward without requiring recruiters to be online 24/7.

Best for
High volume hiring and multi site hiring where speed to first response strongly impacts candidate completion.

Typical capabilities

• Chat on web and career sites
• SMS and messaging flows, sometimes WhatsApp
• FAQ and knowledge base responses
• Basic screening questions and routing to humans
• Scheduling handoffs in better products

What to validate

• Content governance, including who can edit answers and how approvals work
• Escalation paths to a recruiter or coordinator
• Language support and accessibility
• Reporting on where conversations fail

Common failure modes

• Robotic conversations that candidates abandon quickly
• Answers that drift from approved policy and create compliance risk
• Disconnected experience between chatbot and interview workflow

KPIs to track

• Apply completion rate
• Time to first response
• Conversion from chat to scheduled screen
• Drop off reasons, categorized

Common vendors to evaluate Paradox, Tenzo AI, XOR, Humanly, Talkpush

---

What it solves
Early stage screening at scale with consistent structure. This layer can reduce coordinator load and improve consistency across recruiters and locations.

Voice and video are not equal. Video is asynchronous and often favors candidates who are camera comfortable. Voice reduces the camera factor and can feel more natural for some role families, especially when paired with clear structure and a predictable flow.

Best for

• High volume roles where initial screening is repetitive and time consuming
• Distributed operations that need consistency across sites
• Staffing firms that need faster qualification and rediscovery
• Regulated environments where auditability and fairness matter

Typical capabilities

• Structured interview flows with standardized questions
• Transcripts or recordings and reviewer artifacts
• Scorecards and rubric alignment
• Identity checks, integrity checks, and fraud detection in stronger products
• ATS write back of results, notes, and dispositions

What to validate

• Candidate experience, including how the system sounds and behaves at scale
• Whether the platform produces auditable artifacts a reviewer can rely on
• How scoring is generated, how it is explained, and how it can be challenged
• Data retention controls and access controls for recordings and transcripts
• What happens when a candidate needs accommodation or human escalation

Common failure modes in voice AI

• Systems that sound robotic and reduce completion rates
• Limited audit logging and limited explainability, which becomes a blocker in enterprise procurement
• Compliance statements that are not supported by artifacts you can review and retain
• Scoring approaches that drift over time without transparent change control

When buyers describe a voice solution as not enterprise ready, they are usually pointing to audits. They want an answer to who changed what, when, and why, plus evidence a reviewer can inspect. If a vendor cannot support those needs, it becomes hard to deploy in regulated environments.

KPIs to track

• Screen completion rate
• Time from apply to qualified screen
• Recruiter minutes saved per screen
• Consistency of pass through rates across sites and locations, reviewed appropriately
• Candidate drop off reasons and transcript quality

Common vendors to evaluate Tenzo AI, HireVue, Willo, myInterview

---

4) Tenzo profile

Tenzo is best understood as a structured, voice first screening and workflow platform designed for high volume and staffing use cases where auditability, consistency, and candidate experience are non negotiable.

---