Underdog.io Integration for Greenhouse: Automate Candidate & Job Sync, Improve Source Attribution
Titus Juenemann •
August 2, 2024
TL;DR
The Underdog.io integration for Greenhouse automates candidate and job synchronization, reduces manual data entry, and improves source attribution for clearer recruiting metrics. This article explains how the integration works, who benefits, practical implementation steps, key KPIs to track, common troubleshooting fixes, and operational best practices. The conclusion: enabling the integration streamlines candidate flow and frees recruiter time for higher-value work—especially when combined with downstream tools that automate resume screening and prioritization.
Underdog.io’s integration with Greenhouse connects a curated talent marketplace directly into your applicant tracking system so candidates discovered or submitted via Underdog appear inside Greenhouse with source attribution, candidate data, and initial screening details. For hiring teams this replaces CSV exports and manual copy-paste with a persistent, auditable flow that keeps candidate records synchronized between the two platforms. This article explains the integration’s core capabilities, the types of companies that benefit most, practical setup and troubleshooting guidance, and measurable benefits to recruiting operations. It focuses on objective, tactical details you can use to evaluate whether and how to enable the connection in your stack.
Core capabilities of the Underdog.io → Greenhouse integration
- Automated candidate import New candidates presented by Underdog are pushed into Greenhouse without manual CSV handling, creating a candidate profile, resume attachment, and initial application event.
- Job posting synchronization Open roles posted in Greenhouse can be linked so Underdog shows only matched opportunities; adjustments to job titles or locations sync to keep listings consistent.
- Source tagging and reporting Imported candidates are tagged with Underdog as the source, enabling accurate source-based funnel metrics in Greenhouse reports.
- Custom field mapping Key candidate attributes (e.g., years experience, primary skills, portfolio links) map to Greenhouse custom fields for easier screening and filtering.
- Interview scheduling handoffs When a candidate advances in Greenhouse, interview stages and calendar invites can be triggered without re-entering details.
The integration flow is typically synchronous: Underdog identifies a candidate match and creates or updates a profile in Greenhouse through the Greenhouse API or via a connector. Candidate metadata and attachments are included so recruiters immediately see resume, role fit notes, and the initial Underdog score or flags. Behind the scenes, the integration relies on API keys or OAuth credentials managed in Greenhouse’s partner settings and Underdog’s admin dashboard. Most teams will configure job mappings, custom field mapping, and source tags during initial setup to ensure incoming records align with internal workflows.
AI resume screener for Greenhouse
ZYTHR scores every applicant automatically and surfaces the strongest candidates based on your criteria.
- Automatically screens every inbound applicant.
- See clear scores and reasons for each candidate.
- Supports recruiter judgment instead of replacing it.
- Creates a shortlist so teams spend time where it matters.
| Name | Score | Stage |
|---|---|---|
| Oliver Elderberry |
9
|
Recruiter Screen |
| Isabella Honeydew |
8
|
Recruiter Screen |
| Cher Cherry |
7
|
Recruiter Screen |
| Sophia Date |
4
|
Not a fit |
| Emma Banana |
3
|
Not a fit |
| Liam Plum |
2
|
Not a fit |
Feature mapping: Underdog capabilities → Greenhouse effect
| Underdog Feature | Practical impact inside Greenhouse |
|---|---|
| Curated weekly candidate batches | Consistent cadence of candidate imports reduces ad hoc sourcing bursts and smooths recruiter workload across the week |
| Top 5% selection | Higher initial quality reduces downstream screening time and false positives in pipeline |
| Role tagging on submission | Candidates land in the correct job stage in Greenhouse; hiring teams avoid manual reassignment |
| Candidate profile notes | Screener notes and links appear on the Greenhouse candidate page so interviewers see context without visiting Underdog |
| Pay-per-hire subscription states | Source tracking helps attribute cost-per-hire to Underdog for budgeting reports |
Who should enable the Underdog.io integration
- High-volume early-stage engineering teams Startups hiring multiple engineers per quarter that need to accelerate candidate flow while keeping the ATS as the single source of truth.
- Companies replacing manual marketplaces Teams that currently import candidate CSVs or copy details manually and want to reduce data entry errors and processing time.
- Hiring teams using multiple sourcing channels Organizations that need precise source attribution across channels to measure cost-per-hire and channel efficacy.
- Recruiting operations with custom workflows Teams that use Greenhouse custom fields, scorecards, or automated workflows and want Underdog candidates to enter those workflows consistently.
Practical benefits you can measure after enabling the integration include reduced time-to-first-contact, fewer manual data-entry tasks for recruiters, and cleaner reporting for source effectiveness. The integration preserves the candidate context from Underdog (screening notes, portfolio links, and initial tags) so interviewers have the same information regardless of whether they review candidates in Underdog or directly in Greenhouse. Operationally, automating imports frees recruiter hours that would otherwise be spent on copying profiles, attaching resumes, and re-typing candidate notes—time that can be reallocated to candidate engagement or higher-value sourcing activities.
Key implementation checklist (technical items)
| Step | Action & verification |
|---|---|
| Credentials and access | Create API key/OAuth in Greenhouse; grant partner permissions to Underdog; verify with a test candidate push |
| Job mapping | Link Underdog job listings to Greenhouse job IDs to avoid misrouting; test with one role first |
| Custom fields | Map Underdog attributes (skills, links) to Greenhouse custom fields; confirm values display correctly |
| Source tagging | Set up a standardized source tag for Underdog and confirm it appears in reporting |
| Notification settings | Choose who receives alerts on imports, and set calendar permissions for interview scheduling handoffs |
| Data retention & privacy | Review candidate data handling, retention policies, and ensure records meet company privacy requirements |
Common questions about the integration
Q: Will the integration create duplicate candidates?
A: Most integrations check for email or resume fingerprints before creating a profile, but duplicates can occur if identifiers differ. Configure de-duplication rules in Greenhouse and validate mapping logic in initial tests.
Q: Can I control which Underdog candidates are pushed to Greenhouse?
A: Yes — you can set filters in Underdog (by role fit, location, or tags) to only push selected candidates or batches. Implement a staging job or manual approval in the early phase of rollout.
Q: How quickly do candidates appear in Greenhouse after approval?
A: Pushes are typically near real-time or queued within minutes; exact latency depends on API rate limits and configured batching.
Q: Does the integration support interview scheduling?
A: It supports handoffs where Greenhouse triggers calendar events; exact automation for scheduling may require additional calendar integration or permission configuration.
Metrics to track post-integration (practical KPIs)
- Time-to-first-contact (TTFC) Measure average time elapsed between candidate import and recruiter outreach; a lower TTFC correlates with higher engagement rates.
- Source conversion rate Track the percent of Underdog-sourced candidates who reach key stages (screen, onscreen, offer) to evaluate channel quality.
- Data entry hours saved Estimate recruiter hours reclaimed by removing manual import tasks; multiply by average hourly cost to estimate operational savings.
- Cost-per-hire attribution Attribute Underdog fees to hires sourced via the platform, and compare to other channels for ROI calculations.
Best practices for day-to-day use: start with a single hiring track (for example, backend engineers) to validate mappings and workflows, then expand to additional roles. Use Greenhouse scorecards to standardize evaluation for incoming candidates and enforce that Underdog-sourced candidates receive the same rubric as other channels. Maintain a short onboarding playbook for recruiters describing how to review Underdog candidate notes in Greenhouse, which fields to prioritize, and standard outreach templates. Continuous feedback between hiring managers and sourcing can refine filter rules on Underdog to improve match quality.
Troubleshooting: common issues and fixes
| Issue | Likely cause & fix |
|---|---|
| Candidate imports failing | Check API key validity and partner permissions; review rate limit errors and re-run failed batches after credential refresh |
| Fields not displaying correctly | Verify custom field mapping and data types (text vs. URL vs. list); re-send a sample candidate to confirm |
| Missing source attribution | Ensure the integration is set to populate the source field in Greenhouse and that tag naming matches reporting filters |
| Interview calendar conflicts | Confirm calendar permissions and timezone settings; use standardized calendar accounts for automated scheduling |
Security and privacy are operational considerations: the integration should use scoped API credentials, follow least-privilege principles, and have a documented data retention policy aligned to your company’s privacy standards. Review Underdog’s privacy documentation and Greenhouse’s partner security guidelines, and record where candidate data is stored and who has access. If your organization requires vendor reviews, include the integration in your vendor risk checklist and request audit logs or connectivity details that demonstrate secure token handling and access revocation processes.
Cost, scaling, and operational questions
Q: Does enabling the integration change Underdog pricing?
A: Integration itself is typically a connectivity feature; Underdog pricing (pay-per-hire or subscription) remains the same. However, accurate source attribution enables clearer ROI calculations.
Q: How does this scale for enterprise hiring volumes?
A: Enterprises should validate rate limits and batching strategies with Underdog, implement queuing for high-volume imports, and monitor Greenhouse API quotas to avoid throttling.
Q: Can I run the integration alongside other sourcing plugins?
A: Yes — modern ATS setups commonly ingest multiple sources. Ensure consistent source tags and de-duplication rules to keep reporting clean.
Sample implementation scenario: a mid-stage startup wants to hire three backend engineers over 90 days. They enable the Underdog integration, map their backend role in Greenhouse to the Underdog job, and set custom fields for primary stack and years of experience. Each Monday they receive a curated batch; selected candidates are automatically imported to Greenhouse with source tags and initial notes. Recruiters reach out within 24 hours, reducing time-to-first-contact and filling roles faster with fewer administrative steps. This scenario highlights the two immediate operational wins from the integration: predictable candidate flow and reduced manual processing—both of which improve recruiter throughput and allow teams to focus on candidate engagement.
Speed up resume review and cut manual work with ZYTHR
If you use Underdog.io and Greenhouse, pairing that stack with ZYTHR’s AI resume screening automates initial resume review, surfaces the best matches faster, and reduces recruiter screening time. Try ZYTHR to save hours per hire and improve screening accuracy across imported Underdog candidates.