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

Trend Analysis: BNPL Merchant Integration Systems

Retailers across the global landscape are discovering that the true value of a financial partnership lies not in the interest rates offered but in the seamless speed of the integration process. This shift marks a significant departure from the previous decade, where consumer-facing features were the primary focus of fintech innovation. Today, the agility of the backend defines which merchants

Trend Analysis: Digital Payment Adoption Strategies

The transition from traditional cash-based transactions to expansive digital financial ecosystems has evolved from a progressive luxury into a fundamental necessity for sustainable global economic growth. While the physical availability of payment hardware has reached unprecedented levels across emerging markets, a persistent and troubling gap remains between the simple possession of technology and its successful integration into daily business operations.

Trend Analysis: Unified Mobile Payment Systems

The global movement toward a cashless society is rapidly dismantling the cluttered landscape of digital wallets through the introduction of unified branding and standardized infrastructures. In an era where convenience serves as the primary currency, the shift from disjointed payment methods to a singular, interoperable identity is crucial for fostering consumer trust and accelerating digital financial inclusion. This analysis explores

Trend Analysis: Embedded Finance in Card Issuing

The traditional boundaries separating banking institutions from everyday digital experiences are dissolving into a unified layer of programmable value that redefines how money moves across the global economy. No longer confined to the silos of legacy banking, financial services are becoming an invisible yet essential layer within the apps and platforms consumers use every day. This shift represents a fundamental

Trend Analysis: AI Cybersecurity in Financial Infrastructure

The sheer velocity at which autonomous intelligence now dissects the digital fortifications of global banks has rendered traditional human-centric defensive strategies nearly obsolete within the current financial landscape. This transformation signifies more than a mere upgrade in computing power; it represents a fundamental reordering of how systemic risk is calculated and mitigated. The International Monetary Fund has voiced growing concerns