Client case study · Consulting platform · GlobalIn production

Every project matched to the right expert.

AI agents that read each project brief and every consultant profile, judge fit by meaning rather than keywords, and hand staffing teams an explained, ranked shortlist. The team still makes the final call.

  • ~25% more efficient staffing: measured across the staffing operation.
  • Faster from intake to shortlist: agents do the first pass through the whole talent pool.
  • Explainable by design: every recommendation shows its reasons.
ClientConsulting & professional services platform
Built withAI agents · LLMs · NLP

Meet our client

Client
Consulting & professional services platform
Industry
Professional services, consulting, talent platforms
Market
Global

In a nutshell

The client connects organisations with specialist consultants across industries and geographies. As the talent pool grew, staffing teams were still matching people to projects by hand, so shortlists were slow, outcomes depended on who did the matching, and good placements were missed. We built AI agents that parse project requirements, interpret consultant profiles, score fit with structured logic and produce ranked, explained shortlists, as decision support for staffing teams who keep the final say.

Client data protectedThe client is anonymised, and every consultant, project, score and profile in the demos is fictional. The matching logic is real; the data is not.
01 · The problem

Keywords miss the best people

Staffing teams searched and screened by hand, and a keyword search only finds the words you type. The project treated matching as a question of meaning instead. Run the same brief both ways.

Project brief · fictional"Revenue forecasting lead for a fast-growing SaaS business"
Fictional consultants. Illustrates the difference between keyword and semantic matching.
What was going wrong
  • Judgment-dependent: matching relied heavily on each person's knowledge of the pool.
  • Slow screening: comparing consultants with requirements took significant time.
  • Did not scale: the bigger the talent pool, the slower staffing became.
  • Inconsistent: different teams produced different shortlists for similar roles.
  • Missed placements: some opportunities were lost while shortlists were built.
  • Under-used talent: available consultants went unnoticed, lowering utilisation.
02 · Semantic role understanding

A messy brief becomes a clear requirement

Project descriptions arrive as free text. A role-parsing agent normalises each one into a structured representation the system can compare. Pick a brief, parse it, then click any field to see where it came from.

Fictional briefs.
03 · Talent profile interpretation

Every CV, made comparable

Consultants describe the same skill a dozen ways. A profile agent reads experience, skills and availability and converts them into one comparable profile. Watch the raw phrases resolve.

Fictional consultants and profiles.
04 · Structured candidate scoring

A ranked shortlist, with the reasons attached

Matching logic scores each consultant on skills, experience, industry and availability together, then ranks them. Change what matters for this project and watch the order move. Open any consultant to see why.

Project · fictionalERP finance transformation · 6 months · EU time zones
Fictional consultants, weights and scores. The structure (criteria, scores, ranking, explanations) mirrors the real system.
05 · Human in the loop

AI recommends. Staffing teams decide.

The agents are a decision-support layer. Staffing teams review every recommendation and finalise placements, and because everyone starts from the same explained ranking, outcomes stop depending on who picked up the brief.

Illustrative of the consistency gain. Fictional consultants.
06 · Architecture

Agents inside the staffing workflow

Agent-based workflows connect to the client's staffing systems and data: project intake in, parsed requirements and interpreted profiles in the middle, an explained shortlist back to the team. Tap a component, or trace a project.

07 · What made it hard

Trust matters as much as speed

Unstructured text on both sides, skills, experience and availability to weigh together, and a hard requirement that recommendations stay transparent and staffing teams stay in control. Flip each card.

08 · The result

A manual process became a scalable decision system

Following deployment, the matching system improved staffing efficiency and placement speed, and increased utilisation across a global talent pool.

~25%improvement in staffing operational efficiency
Fasterturnaround from role intake to candidate shortlist
Lessmanual screening effort for staffing teams
Consistenttalent matching decisions across teams
The resultCandidate discovery accelerated, placements became more consistent, and more of the available talent pool was put to work, with staffing teams firmly in control of every decision.
AI agentsLarge language modelsNatural language processingSemantic skill matchingStructured scoringAgent-based workflow automationStaffing system integrationsEnterprise data integrations
Matching at scale

The right expert. Every time.

AI agents that turn every brief into an explained shortlist, while your team keeps the final call.

What a first conversation covers
  1. 01Your business objective
  2. 02The technical context
  3. 03The right next step
Discuss a project View all case studies →