80
candidates started training
Hiring Staff with Targeted Ads: chat manager recruitment case, Kyiv
Updated: November 9, 2026
Job boards delivered hundreds of empty calls. In six months ads delivered 80 candidates into training, 47 of whom stayed, at ~$54 per interview. Below: the numbers, how it works, and the form.
Results
Results over six months
47
stayed on and are working
~$54
cost per interview — vs. 1–2 monthly salaries per hire with an agency
$5.53
best cost per lead (CPL)
In short: this is the AkitaLab Lead Generation Accelerator in action. Three channels (Meta Ads + Google Ads + a landing page), server-side infrastructure, and a CRM quality loop: candidate statuses were fed back into the ads, and the algorithm learned to bring not "clickers" but people who make it to the interview and show up for work. Decisions were made in money metrics — cost per interview, not cost per click. Instead of a chaotic flow from job boards — a steady 6–7 new employees a month and an unburdened HR team.
Funnel
The funnel: from application to employee
The quality of inbound applications is controlled on three levels: qualifying questions in the form (for example, readiness to relocate), deduplication on the server, and training the algorithm on the CRM statuses.
Across the whole period about $9,000 went into ads — roughly $113 per candidate in training and ~$191 per candidate who stayed on. That is ad budget paid directly to the platforms.
Request
Need the same flow of candidates? Get a strategy session
80 → 47into training → stayed on
~$54cost per interview
$5.53best cost per lead
Numbers from this very case. You work with me directly — no agency markup.
How it works
How it works in plain words
A fast and cheap start
Instead of guessing for months which ad will work, in a few weeks of tests we find the working options and switch off whatever doesn't bring candidates.
A site instead of "applying blind"
The candidate first lands on the site, reads the terms — and only then leaves their contact.
The hottest candidates from search
Some people are job-hunting right now — they type "office job, Kyiv" into search and land on your site.
Ads that learn from your own candidates
HR marks in the CRM who made it to the interview and into training. Those statuses are fed back into Meta and Google, and the algorithm looks for people like the ones who actually show up for work, not just anyone who leaves an application. That is what brings the cost per interview down over time.
Who this fits
Who this system fits
- Office or high-volume hiring — from a few new people a month.
- Employers in Ukraine and Cyprus — I work remotely.
- An overheated niche where job boards mostly deliver a "junk" flow.
- The ad budget is sized on the strategy session to your number of vacancies; in this case we ran on $1000–2000/mo.
- A willingness to mark candidate statuses (5 minutes a day for HR) — the system learns from them. No CRM? I will provide mine.
- You need a predictable flow, not one-off spikes of "feast or famine".
Who this does NOT fit:
- You need one person, one time — the system won't have time to pay off; it's cheaper to fill the vacancy manually or through referrals.
- No willingness to mark candidate statuses — without that feedback the algorithm doesn't learn, and the system loses its main advantage.
Need a predictable flow of candidates who show up for work?
Request a strategy session
FAQ
Frequently asked about hiring through ads
Where do you find staff when Work.ua, robota.ua, and OLX don't deliver?
Instead of job boards alone — performance advertising: Meta Ads, Google Ads, and a landing page with a quality feedback loop from the CRM. For example: in this case that system delivered 80 candidates into training and 47 who stayed on over six months, at a cost per interview of ~$54. Why it works this way: in overheated niches job boards produce a flow of "junk" contacts, while ads with a CRM loop learn to bring exactly the people who reach the interview and show up for work.
How much does one hired employee cost through advertising?
660 leads → 166 interviews → 80 in training → 47 retained. In this case — about $191 of ad budget per person who stayed on and is working, and ~$113 per candidate who started training (the interview itself — ~$54). For example: over the whole period about $9000 went to advertising on a budget of $1000–2000/mo. Why it works this way: the cost of a real employee gradually drops — the algorithm learns from CRM statuses and steers the budget toward people who show up for work, not "clickers".
What ad budget do you need to launch this kind of hiring?
We size it on the strategy session to your number of vacancies, city and niche; you pay the ad platforms directly. For example: in this case we ran on $1000–2000/mo — ~$1000/mo was enough at the start, then the budget scaled with the flow of candidates. Why it works this way: the algorithm needs enough applications to learn, so the budget is matched to your hiring volume, not taken from a template.