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

Can AI and Embedded Finance Fuel Adyen’s Market Recovery?

The global fintech sector is currently watching a high-stakes transformation as Adyen NV attempts to redefine its identity amidst one of the most volatile periods in its corporate history. After a staggering 36% decline in share price that saw the stock price flirt with a 52-week low of $10.41, the Dutch payments giant is no longer content with being a

Flowpay and Teya Launch AI-Powered SME Financing in Europe

Small business owners across Europe are discovering that securing vital growth capital no longer requires navigating the labyrinthine hallways of traditional banking institutions or submitting stacks of outdated financial statements. The historical friction of credit applications, often characterized by weeks of uncertainty, is giving way to a new paradigm of digital immediacy. This shift is driven by a strategic partnership

Digital Investment Leads Economic Growth in the Post-Crisis Era

The staggering reality of modern macroeconomics reveals that a nation’s prosperity is no longer anchored by the weight of its industrial machinery but by the invisible strength of its data architecture. While global markets have struggled with sluggish growth since the 2008 financial crisis, a quiet revolution in capital allocation has fundamentally rewritten the rules of economic success. The traditional

OpenAI Acquires Astral to Boost Python Development Tools

The modern software landscape has reached a tipping point where the traditional wait times for code compilation and linting are no longer acceptable for developers working at the edge of artificial intelligence. In a world defined by rapid iteration, OpenAI has officially announced the acquisition of Astral, a move designed to integrate high-performance engineering directly into the most popular programming

Can AI Finally Fix the Broken Customer Experience?

In the ancient city of Ur, roughly 3,776 years ago, a frustrated merchant named Nanni etched a scathing review into a clay tablet, forever memorializing his anger over a delivery of substandard copper ingots. This artifact, now resting in the British Museum, serves as a haunting reminder that the agony of being ignored by a business is a fundamental human