The master-vendor segment has been dominated by the same three or four players for two decades. Not because they’re the only ones with the talent, but because they were the only ones with the operational infrastructure to coordinate dozens of subcontractors at once. Master-Vendor Distribution closes that gap. Set the rules. Let the platform run. Take the contracts that used to be out of reach.
Per client, configure the distribution model: who gets what share, in what order, under what conditions. The 60÷20÷20 between your internal pool and your subcontractors. The performance rules that promote responsive vendors. The cascade windows that govern when secondary vendors get involved. Once it’s configured, every incoming shift routes through the same logic — automatically.
A shift opens. Master-Vendor Distribution checks the rules and routes it. Primary vendor first, internal pool first, or whatever your config says. If the primary doesn’t fill within the time you’ve set, the shift cascades to secondary vendors. First confirm wins. The shift cancels everywhere else. Secondary vendor fills don’t count against the primary’s share. The contractual ratio holds.
The work that used to require a full-time compliance analyst now lives in the platform. Daily planning snapshots for the five-year audit trail. Replacement registers logging every who-replaced-whom decision. Live vendor-share dashboards. Tender-committee visibility without a spreadsheet rebuild.
Configure how every client’s shifts flow across your subcontractors. Volume splits (60÷20÷20, 50÷30÷20, whatever the contract requires). Performance rules. Sector specialisation. Location proximity. Vendor priority. The logic that used to live in your operational team’s head now lives in the platform and runs every shift, every day, without manual intervention.
If a primary vendor can’t fill within the time you set, the shift cascades to secondary vendors automatically, but stays open at the primary too. First match wins; the shift cancels everywhere else. And critically: shifts filled by the secondary don’t count against the primary’s distribution share. The ratio your contract guarantees stays intact. The fill rate goes up.
Every distribution decision the platform makes is visible and explainable. Live filter by vendor source. Live share-monitoring against the contractual ratio. Daily compliance snapshots. The transparency a master-vendor contract requires, built into the system rather than reconstructed at year-end.
FAQ
The two modules compound. Connected Staffing handles the matching and execution within your own pool. Master-Vendor Distribution handles the routing across pools (yours plus your subcontractors). Customers running both see the full value; customers starting with only Master-Vendor still get the cross-vendor coordination but route to subcontractors for the matching work.
Three things. First, the distribution ratio is enforced and monitored, not “we’ll try to keep it roughly balanced”. Second, the cascade logic recovers shifts a single-vendor model would have lost, without breaking the contract. Third, the audit trail is automatic: the compliance work that historically required a dedicated coordinator happens as a side-effect.
Yes. Configure the rules to reflect what actually matters for the client: response time, fill rate, candidate quality, sector specialisation. Vendors that perform get more share. Vendors that slip lose it. The platform tracks the underlying data automatically, so the rules execute on facts rather than someone’s annual review.
That’s the situation we’re built for. Master-Vendor Distribution sits between you and your subcontractors. They can be on their own platforms (Bullhorn, MyTools, Zvoove) or fully integrated with bookU. The distribution logic runs the same either way; the data exchange is the platform’s job.
When a primary vendor can’t fill a shift within the time you set, the shift cascades to secondary vendors, but stays open at the primary too. The first to confirm wins; the shift cancels everywhere else automatically. Critically, cascade fills don’t count against the primary’s contractual share, so your distribution ratio stays intact.
It’s the set of rules that determine how shifts from one client get distributed across your subcontractors and your internal pool. Volume splits, performance thresholds, sector specialisations, cascade windows, vendor priorities, etc. configured per client, applied to every shift automatically.