Human Resources
Interviewing seventy candidates a month without burning the recruiter's hours
AI screening interviews: the candidate talks 8 to 12 minutes with a virtual interviewer and the recruiter gets a report with quoted evidence.
8-12 min
per screening interview, capped at fifteen
System capability, not a client business result.
70
interviews a month sustained in parallel across seven roles
System capability, not a client business result.
100%
of scores linked to the passage of conversation that supports them
System capability, not a client business result.
The first screen in a recruiting process is volume work: many short conversations, almost all of them to rule people out. It is the kind of work that consumes a recruiter’s hours and rewards their judgment least.
Our platform absorbs that part, and it is running today. The recruiter generates a link; the candidate opens it on their phone without installing anything and is met by a virtual interviewer with a face and a voice, which converses in Spanish, follows up on what it hears, and closes properly. Eight to twelve minutes.
The problem: the calendar decides, not the judgment
Seventy screening interviews a month across seven openings add up to dozens of hours nobody gets back. Coordinating the slot, waiting on the no-show, asking the same six questions, taking notes while listening, and then trying to compare twenty conversations that happened over three weeks.
The real cost is not the time. It is that the result comes out uneven. The Monday-at-nine interview is nothing like the Friday-at-five one, and comparing the two ends up measuring the interviewer’s mood as much as the candidate. Good people get cut for scheduling reasons and weak ones advance because not everyone was asked the same thing.
What runs today
The interview. The candidate opens their link and is met by an interviewer with a face and a voice. It is not a spoken form: it converses, follows up when an answer falls short, and closes professionally. Eight to twelve minutes, capped at fifteen, because a screen that runs forty minutes is no longer a screen.
The per-candidate report. An overall score and a score per competency, on the same scale for everyone. Under each score, the verbatim passage of the conversation that supports it. Plus the full transcript, in case someone wants to read the whole thing.
The per-role view. The sorted ranking, the candidates-by-competency matrix, and the process funnel — invited, started, completed, evaluated — with conversion rates. All exportable for circulating internally.
The design decision that mattered most
An AI report that hands over a number and nothing else cannot be defended in front of a boss. The first question will be “why did you give them a three?”, and “because the model said three” is not an answer.
So every score keeps its origin. The recruiter clicks and lands on the exact moment in the interview where the candidate said the thing that supports that number. They do not have to trust the system: they can go verify, and they can bring that evidence into the decision meeting.
What changes for the team
The recruiter stops running the screen and keeps the decision, which is where their judgment actually counts. They walk into the conversation having already read the candidate, knowing what to ask and what not to ask again.
And the process stops depending on the time of day. An agent asks the same way every time and arrives at interview number seventy with the same attention it brought to the first.
The figures on this page are platform capability — interview length, sustained volume, traceability of scores — not a client’s business results.
Do you have several roles open?
If the first screen is eating your recruiting team’s calendar, book a 30-minute session. We will show you the platform running, with one of your real openings on the table.