Source in Surhires, submit into Greenhouse once

It is worth being direct, because integration pages are often thinly disguised displacement pitches. If your company runs Greenhouse, Greenhouse is your applicant tracking system and your system of record for the hiring process. Interview kits, scorecards, approvals, offer workflow and hiring reporting live there, your hiring managers have been trained on it, and your data retention policy is written around it.

Surhires is not asking for that job. It sits in front, in the part of the funnel that a corporate ATS was never designed for: outbound sourcing, long-lived candidate relationships, talent pools that stay warm between requisitions, multi-channel nurture, and the silver-medallist who was strong two years ago and is worth a call now.

For an RPO or an agency the same logic holds with an extra constraint. The client will not replace their system of record because a supplier prefers a different tool, and asking them to is how a contract gets shorter. The integration exists so the supplier can run its own desk properly and still deliver into the client environment cleanly.

In-house sourcing teams commonly end up with a spreadsheet or a lightweight CRM alongside the ATS, because the ATS record starts when a person applies and sourcing happens long before that. So a sourcer works a prospect in one place, and when the prospect finally agrees to be considered, retypes the whole profile into the other.

Every retype loses something. Source attribution becomes generic. The nurture history disappears. The resume version that gets uploaded is whichever one was handy. And the same person gets created twice under two spellings of their name, which is a duplicate the hiring team will trip over at offer stage.

The push is one way: Surhires into Greenhouse. A candidate is created or matched against an existing record, attached to a specific job, placed at the agreed stage, with the resume, contact details, source and a summary of the sourcing conversation.

The pull back is deliberately narrow: application status and stage for the candidates Surhires sent, so a sourcer knows whether their prospect moved forward without needing a Greenhouse seat. Nothing else is planned to come back.

What will not sync back: interview scorecards, structured interview feedback, offer details, approval chains, hiring manager comments, internal notes written by the hiring team, EEO responses, and any candidate the sourcing team did not introduce. Those belong to the employer and to the system of record. A supplier-side CRM that mirrors a client's interview feedback is a data-protection conversation nobody wants to have.

The reason to run a sourcing layer in front of an ATS is that the two systems optimise for different time horizons. An ATS is organised around live requisitions. A sourcing CRM is organised around people, and a person stays interesting for years after the requisition they were first considered for was filled by somebody else.

Talent pools, nurture sequences and rediscovery all depend on that longer horizon. So does the number most heads of talent care about: how much of your hiring came from your own pipeline rather than from paid channels or an agency fee. Source attribution that survives the handoff into the ATS is what makes that number real.

Work the prospect in Surhires through sourcing, outreach and screening. When they agree to be considered, create them in Greenhouse against the requisition, upload the resume from Surhires, set the source accurately rather than accepting a default, and paste a short summary of the outreach history into the candidate note.

Then record the Greenhouse job and candidate reference back on the Surhires record as a custom field. That one habit is what makes the eventual migration to a real connector cheap, and in the meantime it lets you reconcile the two systems without guessing which record is which.