Back in the day, when I was directly responsible for staffing branches, my number one objective was simple and non-negotiable: remove unnecessary variability from branch to branch.
Not eliminate autonomy.
Not suffocate local market nuance.
But eliminate randomness.
Because in staffing, inconsistency doesn’t show up as a single failure. It shows up as unpredictable growth, margin leakage, client churn, recruiter burnout, sales turnover and leadership frustration. And when you operate 100 branches across major U.S. markets, inconsistency compounds fast.
In my conversations with staffing executives, the overwhelming majority believe inconsistency is a people problem:
In reality, inconsistent branch performance is almost always a process problem disguised as a talent problem.
High-performing staffing companies do not rely on hero managers. They rely on structured, repeatable systems/processes that allow average managers to produce above-average results.
And staffing is not complicated at its core. There are two core processes that drive every staffing company:
Every dollar of revenue flows through those two processes. Every operational breakdown can be traced back to one of them. Here is how they layout on top of each other:
At its simplest level, staffing companies do three things:
One branch:
Strong branches do not “sell more.” They execute CARP better.
CARP is not a slogan—it is a sequence:
In underperforming branches, CARP breaks down in predictable ways:
Top-performing branches run CARP the same way every time, adjusting tactics based on Voice of the Customer—not emotion or excuses.
You cannot fix client inconsistency without fixing talent inconsistency.
TARP mirrors CARP:
Weak branches treat recruiting as transactional. Strong branches treat it as a managed pipeline.
When TARP is inconsistent:
Consistency in TARP reduces variability in CARP. Always.
Here’s the leadership mistake I see repeatedly: Executives swing between over-standardization and over-autonomy. The answer is neither.
The goal is:
Standardize the process. Customize the execution.
Every branch should:
But each branch should adapt:
Structure creates freedom. Not the other way around.
When walking into a struggling branch, I never started with motivational speeches.
I asked four questions:
Then we did three things—every time:
1. Diagnose with Data, Not Opinion.
2. Install Non-Negotiable Operating Rhythms
3. Build Habits, Not Heroics
Consistency doesn’t come from talent alone. It comes from habit.
Branches didn’t improve because managers “tried harder.”They improved because the work became repeatable.
If you lead a significant branch staffing organization and performance varies widely, ask yourself:
Growth doesn’t stall because your people aren’t capable. It stalls because your processes allow inconsistency to survive.
The most valuable thing a staffing leader can do is remove variability that doesn’t create value.
Do that, and the numbers follow.
At Butler Street, we understand that staffing success is not about having the best branch managers. It’s about building a system where every branch can win the same way, adjusted for local reality.
When CARP and TARP run cleanly, consistently, and visibly across the enterprise, scale stops being fragile—and starts being predictable. Contact us to learn how we can help your branches remove variability and improve branch performance.