HRMS migration

Migrate from ChartHop to Recruit CRM & ATS

Field-level mapping, validation, and rollback between ChartHop and Recruit CRM & ATS. We move data and schema; workflows are rebuilt natively in Recruit CRM & ATS.

ChartHop logo

ChartHop

Source

Recruit CRM & ATS

Destination

Recruit CRM & ATS logo

Compatibility

64%

7 of 11

objects map 1:1 between ChartHop and Recruit CRM & ATS.

Complexity

BStandard

Timeline

3-5 weeks

Rollback included Accuracy guarantee Field-level validation

Overview

What this migration involves

Moving from ChartHop to Recruit CRM is a platform-category migration: ChartHop is a visual-first people operations and headcount planning suite, while Recruit CRM is a recruitment agency ATS and candidate relationship platform. The migration path centers on ChartHop's People (employee records that become candidates), Jobs (positions that become Recruit CRM vacancies), and department hierarchy. Headcount planning scenarios, which are sandboxed planning objects inside ChartHop, are not accessible via public API and cannot be migrated programmatically; we flag their existence during scoping so the customer can export them as reference documents or re-create them manually. We audit every active ATS connector (Jobvite, Greenhouse) to identify which job requisitions, candidate associations, and hiring statuses sync cleanly to Recruit CRM vacancies versus which require manual re-entry. Matrix team structures, engagement survey results, and goal hierarchies do not map to standard Recruit CRM objects and are flagged for admin review. We do not migrate workflows, sequences, or automations as code; we deliver a written map of every automation requiring rebuild.

Field-level fidelity

Every standard and custom field arrives verified.

Schema-aware mapping

AI proposes the map; you confirm before any record moves.

Relationships preserved

Parent–child, lookups, and ownership stay linked.

Full activity history

Calls, emails, meetings — with original timestamps.

Attachments & notes

Documents, uploads, and inline notes move with the record.

Why teams make this switch

Two sides of the same decision

Leaving

ChartHop logo

ChartHop

What's pushing teams away

  • Integration depth with payroll and ATS systems is inconsistent; some teams report that data syncs require manual reconciliation or additional middleware.
  • Limited customization compared to enterprise HR suites; organizations with complex workflows or unique data models find ChartHop too opinionated.
  • Technical stability concerns include occasional data staleness, crashes, and site instability reported in user reviews.
  • Steep learning curve for advanced features like custom scenario types and approval workflows; initial admin configuration is required before teams can use the platform fully.
  • Custom field proliferation without governance leads to cluttered data sheets and confusing reporting views over time.

Choosing

Recruit CRM & ATS logo

Recruit CRM & ATS

What's pulling them in

  • Agencies choose Recruit CRM for its full customizability — pipelines, stages, and fields can be tailored to any recruitment workflow without developer involvement.
  • Small teams value the built-in CRM and ATS combined in one subscription, eliminating the need to purchase and sync separate systems.
  • The Chrome extension for one-click LinkedIn profile collection streamlines candidate sourcing and reduces manual data entry for recruiters.
  • Responsive customer support with fast issue resolution is consistently cited as a reason teams stick with the platform long-term.
  • Automation options including email sequences and workflow triggers allow recruitment agencies to reduce repetitive manual outreach tasks.

Object mapping

How ChartHop objects map to Recruit CRM & ATS

Each row shows how a ChartHop object lands in Recruit CRM & ATS, including any object-level transformations, lookup resolution, or schema-design dependencies.

Typical mapping — final map is confirmed during the sample migration step.

ChartHop

People (Employees)

maps to

Recruit CRM & ATS

Candidate

1:1
Fully supported

ChartHop People records map to Recruit CRM Candidates. Core fields (name, email, phone, job title, department) migrate 1:1. Reporting manager relationships do not map natively to Recruit CRM's candidate model since Recruit CRM does not store employee hierarchy; we preserve the manager reference as a custom text field manager_name__c. Compensation fields (base, variable, equity) migrate as custom fields on the Candidate record. Active employment status maps to candidate availability status in Recruit CRM.

ChartHop

Jobs (Positions)

maps to

Recruit CRM & ATS

Vacancy / Job

1:1
Fully supported

ChartHop Jobs (open or filled positions) map to Recruit CRM Vacancies. Job title, department, job level, and compensation band migrate. Job status (active, closed, on-hold) maps to Recruit CRM vacancy status. Headcount planning scenario data attached to a Job (proposed hires, budget impacts) cannot migrate because ChartHop does not expose scenario data via API; we flag active scenarios during scoping for manual re-creation.

ChartHop

Departments

maps to

Recruit CRM & ATS

Organization / Custom Field

1:1
Fully supported

ChartHop department hierarchy (parent-child relationships) maps to Recruit CRM organizational structure as a custom Department field on Candidate and Vacancy. We reconstruct the full department tree as a flat list plus parent references. Matrix team affiliations (cross-functional reporting) do not map to Recruit CRM's standard schema and are flagged for admin review.

ChartHop

ATS Requisitions (Jobvite)

maps to

Recruit CRM & ATS

Vacancy

lossy
Fully supported

Jobvite requisitions synced to ChartHop migrate to Recruit CRM Vacancies with job requisition ID preserved. Status (open, filled, cancelled) maps to vacancy status. Internal transfers synced from Jobvite to ChartHop are NOT supported by ChartHop and will not appear in the export; we flag internal transfer records for manual re-entry. Email matching between ChartHop and Jobvite (required by ChartHop's connector) is audited during pre-migration validation.

ChartHop

ATS Requisitions (Greenhouse)

maps to

Recruit CRM & ATS

Vacancy

lossy
Fully supported

Greenhouse job data synced to ChartHop migrates to Recruit CRM Vacancies. Greenhouse custom fields require custom field mapper setup in ChartHop before export; we audit whether custom field mappers are configured and whether they follow ChartHop's required endpoint-prefixed naming convention (e.g., job.custom_fields.greenhouse_field). Missing or misconfigured mappers result in data gaps that we surface before migration.

ChartHop

Compensation Data

maps to

Recruit CRM & ATS

Custom Fields on Candidate

1:many
Mapping required

ChartHop compensation fields (base compensation, cash compensation, variable pay, equity, total compensation, compensation band) migrate as custom fields on the Recruit CRM Candidate record. Each compensation component maps to a separate custom field (base_comp__c, variable_comp__c, equity__c, compensation_band__c). Compensation cycle configurations (merit, promotion) are planning data and do not migrate; we export a snapshot of the most recent cycle values as reference documents.

ChartHop

Custom Fields

maps to

Recruit CRM & ATS

Custom Fields on Candidate/Vacancy

lossy
Mapping required

ChartHop unlimited custom fields require a governance audit before migration because the platform enforces no naming conventions or deduplication. We identify duplicate or near-duplicate custom fields (e.g., 'Comp Band' vs 'Compensation Band') and surface them for customer review. Each validated custom field maps to an equivalent Recruit CRM custom field with appropriate data type (text, date, picklist, number). Field-level access controls from ChartHop do not transfer.

ChartHop

Documents and Files

maps to

Recruit CRM & ATS

Attachments on Candidate

1:1
Mapping required

ChartHop file attachments per employee profile (miscellaneous or field-linked) migrate to Recruit CRM candidate attachments. All files must be under 100MB per ChartHop's limit. We use ChartHop's file export mechanism to retrieve documents and attach them to the corresponding Candidate record. File type categorization does not map to Recruit CRM categories and is preserved as a note or custom text field.

ChartHop

Time Off and PTO Balances

maps to

Recruit CRM & ATS

Custom Fields or Reference Documents

1:1
Mapping required

Current PTO balances as of the migration snapshot migrate as custom fields on the Candidate record (pto_balance__c). Historical accrual logs are available via a separate ChartHop export pass but Recruit CRM does not have a native accrual tracking model; we recommend exporting accrual history as a reference spreadsheet for the customer's HR admin to maintain separately if needed.

ChartHop

Performance Reviews

maps to

Recruit CRM & ATS

Not Supported (Flag for Manual)

1:1
Mapping required

Performance review cycles, review forms, and submitted responses stored in ChartHop's Performance module do not map to Recruit CRM objects. Recruit CRM is a recruitment ATS, not a performance management system. We export review metadata (cycle names, form structures) and anonymized response aggregates as reference documents. Review templates with custom question types are flagged for manual re-creation if needed at the destination HRMS.

ChartHop

Goals

maps to

Recruit CRM & ATS

Not Supported (Flag for Manual)

1:1
Mapping required

ChartHop Goals (company, team, and individual objectives with progress tracking) do not map to Recruit CRM objects. Recruit CRM does not have a goals or OKR module. We export goal hierarchies and progress values as a reference document. Cascading goal dependencies (where child goals roll up to parent goals) cannot be preserved and are flagged for manual re-creation if needed at the destination platform.

Gotchas + challenges

What specifically takes care here

Platform-specific issues from each side, plus the pair-specific challenges that don't show up on either platform's page on its own.

ChartHop logo

ChartHop gotchas

High

Headcount planning scenarios are not accessible via API

Medium

Spreadsheet imports require XLSX format and strict formatting rules

Medium

ATS integration with Jobvite requires exact email matching

Medium

Internal transfers are not supported in ATS sync

Low

Custom fields proliferate without governance by default

Recruit CRM & ATS logo

Recruit CRM & ATS gotchas

High

API rate limits are license-scaled and can throttle bulk migration

Medium

Custom field schemas vary per organization and require field-level mapping

Medium

Files and email attachments require separate extraction and re-upload

Low

Email sequences and automation logic do not transfer between platforms

Pair-specific challenges

  • Headcount planning scenarios are inaccessible via API

    ChartHop does not expose headcount planning scenarios through its public API. All scenario data — including proposed hires, budget impacts, approval statuses, and the six scenario types (create, update, terminate/backfill, promotion, budget, custom) — lives inside ChartHop's planning workflow engine. We flag active scenarios during migration scoping so the customer can export them as reference spreadsheets before cutover. Recruit CRM does not have a headcount planning module; the customer may need a separate planning tool or spreadsheet to re-create scenario logic manually.

  • Spreadsheet imports require XLSX format not CSV

    ChartHop explicitly rejects CSV files for bulk imports and may corrupt CSV data if used. Imports must use XLSX format with country codes in all international phone numbers, complete job titles, and identifiers matching across source systems. We validate and reformat all customer-provided ChartHop exports from XLSX into the format required by Recruit CRM's import mechanism during the transformation pass. Any CSV-based export the customer provides from a ChartHop report must be converted before loading.

  • Internal transfers do not sync from ChartHop to ATS

    ChartHop's ATS integration (Jobvite, Greenhouse) explicitly does not support internal transfer data. If the organization uses internal mobility workflows, those transfer records exist in ChartHop but will not appear in the ATS sync export. We flag internal transfer records as requiring manual re-entry at Recruit CRM. The customer should provide a separate export of internal transfer history if this data needs to be preserved.

  • Matrix team structures have no Recruit CRM equivalent

    ChartHop's Matrix Teams feature models cross-functional collaboration where employees report to multiple leaders. This non-standard structure does not map to Recruit CRM's candidate and vacancy model. We export matrix assignment data (employee, secondary manager, team role) as a reference document. If matrix reporting is critical, the customer should consider a separate HRMS for this data rather than trying to model it inside Recruit CRM.

  • Recruit CRM lacks deleted-meeting Google Calendar sync

    Recruit CRM does not synchronize deleted meetings bidirectionally with Google Calendar. If the customer relies on calendar sync for interview scheduling, deleted meetings in Google Calendar will not automatically update in Recruit CRM. We document this limitation in the integration plan. The customer may need to use Recruit CRM's native scheduling features or a third-party integration (Zapier) for calendar reconciliation. This is a pair-specific limitation discovered in Reddit r/RecruitmentAgencies user feedback.

Migration approach

Six steps for a successful ChartHop to Recruit CRM & ATS data migration

  1. Discovery and ATS connector audit

    We audit the customer's ChartHop instance across modules in use (Core, Headcount Planning, HRIS, Compensation, Performance, Engagement), active ATS connectors (Jobvite, Greenhouse, Lever), record counts for People, Jobs, Departments, and file attachments, and any active headcount planning scenarios. We also audit whether ChartHop-to-ATS field mappers are configured and whether internal transfer workflows exist. The discovery output is a written migration scope that explicitly calls out what migrates, what requires manual re-entry, and what cannot migrate at all.

  2. Data hygiene pass on custom fields

    ChartHop allows unlimited custom fields without naming governance, leading to duplicate or near-duplicate fields over time. We run a custom field deduplication pass: identifying fields with similar names (e.g., 'Comp Band' vs 'Compensation Band'), consolidating logically equivalent fields, and surfacing a decision matrix for the customer's HR admin to approve or revise before field mapping. This step prevents redundant custom fields from entering Recruit CRM and clogging the candidate schema.

  3. Schema design and custom field creation in Recruit CRM

    We design the Recruit CRM destination schema: custom fields on Candidate (compensation fields, manager reference, department as structured picklist), custom fields on Vacancy (job level, compensation band, source ATS), and organizational structure mapping. We pre-create all custom fields with correct data types before any data import. Matrix team data and headcount scenario references are not created as Recruit CRM objects; we document them as reference exports instead.

  4. ATS requisition extraction and field mapper validation

    We extract job requisition data from each active ATS connector (Jobvite, Greenhouse). For Greenhouse, we audit whether custom field mappers follow ChartHop's required endpoint-prefixed naming convention and flag any misconfigured mappings. We extract candidate-to-job associations and hiring statuses. Internal transfer records are flagged separately for manual re-entry since ChartHop does not expose them via ATS sync.

  5. Production migration in dependency order

    We run production migration in record-dependency order: Vacancies first (since Candidates link to them), then Candidates (with ATS source references and compensation data in custom fields), then file attachments linked to Candidates. Department hierarchy is delivered as a structured reference document. Each phase emits a row-count reconciliation report. Any ATS requisition records with missing custom field mapper data are flagged for manual completion.

  6. Cutover, validation, and workflow inventory handoff

    We freeze ChartHop writes during cutover, run a final delta migration of any records modified during the window, then enable Recruit CRM as the system of record. We deliver a written workflow inventory documenting every ChartHop automation (headcount approval workflows, onboarding task sequences, time-off request flows) requiring rebuild in Recruit CRM's workflow builder. We do not rebuild workflows as code inside the migration scope. We support a one-week post-cutover window for data reconciliation issues.

Platform deep dives

Context on both ends of the pair

ChartHop logo

ChartHop

Source

Strengths

  • Visual, live org chart that updates as employee data changes, eliminating manual spreadsheet maintenance
  • Modular per-employee pricing lets customers buy only the modules they need (Core, Headcount Planning, HRIS, Compensation, Performance, Engagement)
  • Headcount planning supports six scenario types (create, update, terminate/backfill, promotion, budget, custom) with live budget impact
  • Sits on top of existing payroll providers (ADP, Gusto, etc.) rather than requiring a payroll switch, lowering adoption risk
  • Built-in connectors for ATS (Jobvite, Greenhouse, Lever), HRIS (BambooHR, Namely, Rippling) and equity tools for end-to-end people-data sync

Weaknesses

  • Payroll and ATS integration depth varies significantly across connectors; sync frequency and field mapping differ by system.
  • Advanced features like custom scenario types and approval workflows require significant initial admin configuration before teams can use them productively.
  • No public API documentation for headcount planning scenarios; sandbox planning data is inaccessible for programmatic migration.
  • Matrix team structures and multi-manager reporting relationships are ChartHop-specific and do not map cleanly to standard HRMS schemas.
  • Limited offline or bulk-export options for large employee rosters; file uploads capped at 100MB per document.
Recruit CRM & ATS logo

Recruit CRM & ATS

Destination

Strengths

  • Fully customizable pipelines, stages, and fields without requiring developer involvement
  • Combines recruitment CRM and ATS in one subscription for staffing agencies and small teams
  • Built-in email sequences and automation reduce manual outreach work
  • Chrome extension enables one-click LinkedIn profile collection directly into the CRM
  • Responsive customer support cited across multiple reviews with fast resolution times

Weaknesses

  • Several features are gated as paid add-ons rather than included in the base subscription
  • Email functionality has been reported as unreliable by multiple users
  • Interface occasionally lags during high-activity periods in large pipelines
  • Pricing is considered higher than comparable recruitment CRMs by some customers
  • Limited native reporting — users request pre-made report exports rather than manual data pulls

Complexity grading

How hard is this migration?

Standard HRMS migration. 1 of 7 objects need a mapping; the rest are 1:1.

B

Overall complexity

Standard migration

Derived from compatibility, mapping clarity, API constraints, and data volume across ChartHop and Recruit CRM & ATS.

  • Object compatibility

    B

    1 of 7 objects need a mapping; the rest are 1:1.

  • Field mapping clarity

    C

    Field mapping is derived from defaults — final spec confirmed during the sample migration.

  • Timeline complexity

    B

    7-object category — typical timelines run 2–7 days end-to-end.

  • API constraints

    B

    ChartHop: Not publicly documented.

  • Data volume sensitivity

    B

    ChartHop doesn't expose a bulk API — REST + parallelization used for high-volume runs.

Estimator

Estimate your ChartHop to Recruit CRM & ATS migration cost

Rule-based pricing — no per-record fees, no manual quotes. Migrations over 2M records are scoped individually.

Step 1

What are you migrating?

Pick a category, then your source and destination platforms.

Category

FAQ

Frequently asked questions about ChartHop to Recruit CRM & ATS data migrations

Answers to the questions buyers ask most during ChartHop to Recruit CRM & ATS migration scoping. Not seeing yours? Book a call.

Can't find your answer?

Walk through your ChartHop to Recruit CRM & ATS migration with a real engineer — 30 minutes, free, written quote within 24 hours.

Book a free 30 minute consultation

Most migrations land between three and five weeks for accounts with up to 2,000 people records, 200 job records, and one active ATS connector. Migrations with multiple ATS connectors (Jobvite plus Greenhouse), compensation data requiring multi-field custom object creation, or a data hygiene pass on proliferated custom fields move to seven to twelve weeks. Headcount planning scenario export, if required, is a manual step outside the migration timeline and adds one to two weeks depending on the number of active scenarios.

Adjacent paths

Related migrations to explore

Ready when you are

Move from ChartHop.
Land in Recruit CRM & ATS, intact.

Tell us record counts and timeline. We'll come back with a written quote inside 1 business day — no commitment, no sales pitch.

Accuracy guarantee Rollback included Quote in 1 business day