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

Building AI-Native Teams Is the New Workplace Standard

The corporate dialogue surrounding artificial intelligence has decisively moved beyond introductory concepts, as organizations now understand that simple proficiency with AI tools is no longer sufficient for maintaining a competitive edge. Last year, the primary objective was establishing a baseline of AI literacy, which involved training employees to use generative AI for streamlining tasks like writing emails or automating basic,

Trend Analysis: The Memory Shortage Impact

The stark reality of skyrocketing memory component prices has yet to reach the average consumer’s wallet, creating a deceptive calm in the technology market that is unlikely to last. While internal costs for manufacturers are hitting record highs, the price tag on your next gadget has remained curiously stable. This analysis dissects these hidden market dynamics, explaining why this calm

Can You Unify Shipping Within Business Central?

In the intricate choreography of modern commerce, the final act of getting a product into a customer’s hands often unfolds on a stage far removed from the central business system, leading to a cascade of inefficiencies that quietly erode profitability. For countless manufacturers and distributors, the shipping department remains a functional island, disconnected from the core financial and operational data

Is an AI Now the Gatekeeper to Your Career?

The first point of contact for aspiring graduates at top-tier consulting firms is increasingly not a person, but rather a sophisticated algorithm meticulously designed to probe their potential. This strategic implementation of an AI chatbot by McKinsey & Co. for its initial graduate screening process marks a pivotal moment in talent acquisition. This development is not merely a technological upgrade

Agentic People Analytics – Review

The human resources technology sector is undergoing a profound transformation, moving far beyond the static reports and complex dashboards that once defined workforce intelligence. Agentic People Analytics represents a significant advancement in this evolution. This review will explore the core principles of this technology, its key features and performance capabilities, and the impact it is having on workforce management and