What Are The Key Differences Between Time to Fill and Time to Hire?

Although some people use the terms interchangeably, “time to fill” and “time to hire” are distinctly different metrics that serve integral parts of the talent acquisition process. The former measures the average number of days it takes to have someone start working in a role, while the latter tracks how fast a candidate progresses through the hiring process until the offer stage, labor experts informed HR Dive. This differentiation can have significant impacts on how companies assess their recruitment efficiency and candidate experience.

Calculating Time to Fill

Rick Hermanns, CEO of global staffing company HireQuest, previously explained his method for calculating the metric known as time to fill. The process involves three essential steps:

  • Define the start and end points for measurement. Typically, the clock might start ticking when a job is posted or when HR receives a job requisition form, ending when the candidate officially begins work.
  • Calculate the duration for a single position by counting the number of workdays from the starting point to the endpoint.
  • Summate the time to fill for each position and divide by the total number of positions filled to obtain the average time to fill.

Adopting these guidelines provides a straightforward way to measure and optimize recruitment timelines.

Trends Around Time to Hire

The report by human capital management company The Josh Bersin Co. and talent firm AMS indicates that time-to-hire rates have risen in recent years, revealing it now takes an average of 44 days to fill a job opening. However, this figure can vary significantly depending on the industry. For instance, energy and defense sectors face more prolonged hiring periods, averaging 67 days for specialists.

The data underscores varying ease and difficulty levels in filling positions, which can inform strategic adjustments to recruitment processes across different sectors. Notably, the findings pointed out that overall hiring in many regions is expected to slow and face more challenges.

The Bottom Line

People often confuse “time to fill” and “time to hire,” but these metrics are quite different and both play important roles in the talent acquisition process. “Time to fill” refers to the average number of days it takes from when a job is posted until a candidate starts working. On the other hand, “time to hire” measures the speed at which someone moves through the hiring process, from the initial job application to the moment an offer is made. According to labor experts consulted by HR Dive, understanding these differences is crucial for companies. It allows organizations to better evaluate their recruitment efficiency and improve aspects of the candidate experience. By analyzing both metrics, employers can identify delays in the hiring process and make improvements to attract and secure top talent more effectively. This kind of insight can lead to more strategic decision-making in talent acquisition, ultimately benefiting both the company and potential employees.

Explore more

Modern ERP Systems Evolve from Documentation to Execution

When a sudden regional power outage strikes a major semiconductor manufacturing hub, the modern enterprise no longer waits for a manual report to trickle through various management tiers; instead, an intelligent system detects the disruption in real-time and immediately begins reallocating existing stock to high-priority orders. This transition marks a departure from the traditional role of Enterprise Resource Planning software,

Will AI Turn Windows Into a Monthly Subscription?

The traditional concept of a computer operating system as a one-time purchase is rapidly dissolving as Microsoft steers Windows 11 toward a persistent service-based architecture. For decades, the standard experience for any personal computer user involved purchasing a hardware device pre-installed with a permanent software license that remained functional for the entire lifespan of the machine. However, the rise of

How Do You Shift From Prompts to Agent Architecture?

The unprecedented acceleration of artificial intelligence integration within enterprise software development has now reached a pivotal inflection point where ad-hoc prompting is no longer sufficient for complex production systems. While the early months of adoption were characterized by individual developers finding clever ways to optimize small tasks, the current requirements of the industry demand a much more structured and predictable

Is Minnesota’s Water Safe After a Coordinated Cyberattack?

The recent identification of a sophisticated cyber intrusion targeting municipal water treatment facilities across Minnesota has raised significant alarms regarding the resilience of critical infrastructure in the Midwest. As state officials and cybersecurity experts analyze the aftermath of this coordinated event, the primary concern remains whether the safety and integrity of the public water supply were ever truly compromised. Initial

State Laws Heighten Risks for SMS Marketing Campaigns

Navigating the intricate maze of modern digital communication has become significantly more perilous for businesses that rely on text message outreach as a primary method for customer engagement and retention. While the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) once served as the definitive guide for national compliance, a wave of state-level legislation has introduced a fragmented regulatory environment that demands immediate