How To Optimize Time To Hire Vs. Quality Of Hire
Time to hire has steadily increased since 2009 according to a recent analysis by Glassdoor. In today’s candidate-driven job market, each day you delay can mean losing out on a valuable hire. In fact, according to MRINetwork’s 2015 recruitment survey, the number one reason for candidates rejecting a job offer was accepting a competing one.
But is faster necessarily better when it comes to hiring?
The length of the interview process
An analysis of 344,250 interview reviews on Glassdoor found that the average job interview process takes 23 days.
- For startups and small companies (less than 250 employees), the average interview process takes 15-20 days.
- For larger companies (1000 and more employees), the average interview process increases to about 25 days.
For in-demand jobs like sales, time to hire is about 40 days.
Time to hire vs. quality of hire
Hiring involves the classic trade-off between speed and quality. A longer interview processes may lead to a higher quality employee due to better screening, but it comes at the cost of lost productivity due to the vacant role. For a crucial function like sales, the potential sales revenue lost per week from not hiring an inside B2B sales rep is an average $14,625. So what’s the best solution?
Finding a candidate screening method that optimizes the trade-off between efficiency and accuracy.
Maximizing quality of hire
Glassdoor’s data found that employers use various screening methods that added time to the interview process:
- Background checks: adds on average 3 days
- Intelligence tests: adds on average nearly 3 days
- Personality assessments: adds on average 1 day
Which screening method would I recommend the most? I’m clearly biased, but it’s personality assessments. Here’s why:
Personality assessments are becoming more popular
As employers are realizing the value of personality assessments, Glassdoor found its use has increased from 12% in 2010 to 18% in 2014.
Personality assessments save you time
A personality assessment can add time to your interview process because most companies use it as a screening method after the interview. Research featured on the Harvard Business Review suggests this is backwards: using a short, online assessment as the first screening step efficiently results in a smaller, better-qualified candidate pipeline before the time-consuming process of interviewing.
Unless you want to waste days sorting through hundreds of unqualified and mismatched job candidates, a personality assessment should come before or even replace resume pre-screening.
Personality assessments have amazing ROI
According to research by Farrell & Hakstian (2001) and data from the Harvard Business Review and the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, personality assessment has resulted in:
- Average increase in quality of hire: 50%
- Average increase in sales productivity: 20.7%
- Average net gain per sales rep’s tenure in sales revenue: $778,050
Hiring a crappy candidate quickly isn’t better than hiring a great candidate slowly. So when it comes to optimizing the trade-off between time to hire and quality of hire, the data tells us a personality assessment is one of the best candidate screening methods.
Want to see what a personality assessment is like for salespeople? Take our 5 minute quiz and discover your unique selling personality at Selling IQ.
Latest posts by Ji-A Min (see all)
- The Recruiting Software Stack: A Buyer’s Guide To The Top 4 Innovations - December 2, 2016
- AI Recruitment: The Future of Automated Recruiting - November 22, 2016
- Google Cloud Jobs API: 4 Things You Need to Know - November 17, 2016