This system map is part of the candidate ownership conflicts guide. It is for ATS implementation partners who already understand the conflict itself (the worked case walks through one) and need to explain how the evidence fits together across systems.
The systems involved and what each one holds
Four places hold pieces of one conflict in a merged recruiting firm, and a fifth often holds the decision:
- Desk A ATS. The candidate record, call and email activities, the filed consent, the ATS entry and, if the desk won, the hire.
- Desk B ATS. A second candidate record for the same person, its own activities and ATS entry, and often nothing about the outcome if the desk lost.
- Client vendor portal. The supplier submission with its timestamp, any duplicate notice, and the client's confirmation of which supplier owns the candidate.
- Contract file. The client agreement for each legacy unit, with the clause that defines who represents a candidate. Two units may hold two versions.
- Decision record. The record of who decided, citing which timestamps and rule. It may sit on the winning candidate record, in a shared drive or in a manager's inbox.
Linking keys: the table
Each row is one record and the key that lets it point at another.
| System | Record | Linking key | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Desk A ATS | Candidate record | Name and primary email | Desk A recruiting lead |
| Desk B ATS | Candidate record | Name and personal email | Desk B recruiting lead |
| Desk A ATS | ATS entry | Job order ID and created time | Desk A recruiting lead |
| Desk B ATS | ATS entry | Job order ID and created time | Desk B recruiting lead |
| Client portal | Supplier submission | Client requisition number and submission timestamp | The client or its program office |
| Client portal | Duplicate notice | Requisition number and worker match | The client or its program office |
| Contract file | Ownership clause | Agreement version and clause number | Commercial operations with counsel |
| Decision record | Decision | Both submission times and the clause cited | Commercial operations head |
| Desk A ATS | Hire | Job order ID linked to the note | Desk A recruiting lead |
Where each join breaks
Person match. Bullhorn keys its candidate matching to last name, the first two letters of the first name and primary email. Someone who gave one desk a work address and the other a personal address shares no email key across the two instances, so the match has to fall back on phone, name variants or the client's own match. Client programs can be richer here: Beeline scores supplier-submitted people against existing worker records on several identifiers, including date of birth and national ID, and an administrator settles likely matches. When that exists, the client's result is often the strongest person key available.
Submission match. The ATS created date should precede or equal the portal timestamp. When recruiters enter ATS entries after submitting in the portal, the ATS shows a later time and the portal is the only reliable clock. Job orders that do not carry the client requisition number need a manual match.
Decision record. The note is the join that makes the others mean something. If it cites only "desk A was first" without the timestamps or clause, a reviewer cannot check it. If it lives in an inbox, it may not survive a mailbox cleanup.
Merge. The UK Information Commissioner's guidance on mergers advises technical input where different systems are involved and an accuracy check afterward. For this map, the risk is concrete: when two candidate records are merged, one set of activity and ATS entry dates can be dropped.
One fully joined case (Illustrative)
Fictional data for a fictional merged firm; not a real case or a completed deal. The same candidate, one requisition, both units.
| Join | Left record | Right record | Key used | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Person | Desk A profile, work address | Desk B profile, personal address | Name plus mobile number, confirmed by the client's match | Same person |
| Submission A | Job order JO-118 ATS entry, Tuesday 10:02 | Client submission, Tuesday 10:05 | Requisition REQ-4471 and time | Matched, three-minute lag |
| Submission B | Job order JO-305 ATS entry, Thursday 11:40 | Client duplicate notice, Wednesday 15:20 | Requisition REQ-4471 | Matched, ATS entry a day late |
| Rule | Decision record | Client agreement, clause 7.2 | Clause number cited in the record | Matched |
| Outcome | Decision record | Desk A hire, five weeks later | Job order JO-118 | Matched |
Every join holds, but notice the second submission: desk B keyed its ATS entry the day after the client logged it, so only the client's clock shows the true order. That is the typical repair a map reveals. In a real firm, expect some rows to read "unmatched" or "unknown"; the map is useful precisely because it shows which ones.
Questions to put to the commercial operations head
Use these to fill the map at metadata level:
- How many ATS instances held candidates during the period, and from which years?
- Do job orders carry the client requisition number, and since when?
- Which clients' portals issue duplicate notices, and which legacy unit holds the supplier login?
- Where are decision records kept, from which year, and who writes them?
- Are there different client agreement versions per legacy unit?
- Has any merge of candidate records already happened, and which dates were kept?
Answers go into the referral brief template. Hire and job order exports are covered on the Bullhorn data export page, and the wider licensing question on staffing firm ATS data licensing.
Qualification and what stays unknown
The map describes records, owners and keys. It does not decide rights. Client portal records may be limited by the client's terms, candidate personal data needs a lawful basis, and after a merger SourceX confirms which entity is the applicant. Why data rights matter explains the order of review.
The introduced firm needs 50+ full-time employees at peak (contractors excluded), documented operating history, rights to license and an authorized contact. Companies in the U.S., Canada and the EU qualify, as do companies in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, India, Singapore, South Africa, Latin America, the UAE and Saudi Arabia when at least 90% of the data is in English. Partners sign the Channel Partner Agreement before submitting; the first valid introduction within the 90-day window is credited when the company submits a verified application, and one partner is credited per company. Buyer interest, the rights result, the de-identification needed and any offer stay unknown until SourceX reviews it. Firms preparing for a sale face similar mapping work; see selling a staffing company.
Next step
Refer a company. Earn up to $100,000. Default reward: 25% of Actual Supplier Payout, capped at $100,000 cumulatively per referred company. Eligibility and payment conditions apply, and a signed Schedule A or addendum can differ. A lead, meeting or signature alone does not trigger payment.
If the map shows a firm whose conflicts still join from both ATS instances to the portal and the note, register as a partner, check the firm against who qualifies and read the program terms before introducing the commercial operations head.