Vendor governance
Build a Recruiting Vendor Scorecard
A scorecard for submissions, quality, communication, and compliance.

A recruiting vendors process should make the request, the evidence, the owner, and the next action visible before a candidate is affected. A scorecard for submissions, quality, communication, and compliance.
Set the recruiting vendors scope
Start by naming the event that creates a record. A record should enter because a defined condition occurred, not because someone remembered to add a task. Record the role, the candidate or request, the source, the owner, and the evidence expected at intake.
The main risk is that a vendor can be measured on volume without quality or compliance evidence. A written rule keeps routine coordination separate from selection and hiring judgment. Use a timestamp and source link rather than a later summary.
Capture the evidence
A usable record includes vendor, role, submissions, interviews, outcomes, issues, and owner. Keep the source beside the record so another reviewer can reconstruct what was known and when.
The talent acquisition lead confirms the decision or exception. The recruiting support role can compile approved metrics, check sources, and route concerns, but it should not fill a gap with an assumption.
| Evidence | Why it matters | Owner |
|---|---|---|
| Source record | Shows what was known | Recruiting support |
| Current status | Shows the next action | Recruiting support |
| Decision note | Shows who approved an exception | Accountable owner |
Separate preparation from judgment
Decisions about vendor selection and contract decisions remain with the authorized owner. Use three labels in the queue: proceed under the written rule, pause for missing evidence, and escalate for a decision.
Apply the labels to real examples. A capable coordinator should know when the next action is preparation and when it is a handoff.
Run the review
Review submission quality, response time, and issue resolution. Sort by age, owner, and exception reason, and confirm that every open item has a next action.
For example, a vendor sends many candidates but few interviews. The review should show what evidence was available, what question remained, and who owned the next step.
Pilot one workflow
Start with one vendor. Test the checklist on a small batch and review exceptions with the owner. Expand only after the workflow produces a reviewable record and a predictable review rhythm.
Explore the related service or continue with a related workflow.
Continue reading
Three related guides
research
Reviewing Agency Submission Duplication
A method for detecting duplicate candidate submissions and ownership disputes.
Read the article