Time-to-Hire Metric

What is the time-to-hire metric?

The time-to-hire metric measures the number of days between the first contact with a candidate, such as receiving their application or conducting an initial phone screening, and the moment they accept a job offer.

This metric shows how efficiently an organization can complete the hiring process, reflecting how smooth and effective both the selection and decision-making stages are. It is also an important indicator of the candidate experience, since the longer the process takes, the higher the risk that qualified candidates will choose an offer from the competition.

How to calculate time-to-hire

The time-to-hire value is expressed in days and calculated using the following formula:

Time-to-hire = date of offer acceptance – date of first contact with the candidate

The “first contact” is usually defined as one of the following dates, for example:

• the day the application is received in the ATS system;
• the day of the initial phone screening;
• the day the first interview invitation is sent.

In practice, when analyzing results at the organization or department level, the average time-to-hire is most often used:

Average time-to-hire = total number of days for all completed hires ÷ number of accepted offers

For example, if a candidate applies on April 4 and accepts the offer on April 20, the time-to-hire is 16 calendar days. If three more recruitments in the same month take 24, 25, and 17 days respectively, the average time-to-hire would be (16 + 24 + 25 + 17) ÷ 4 = 20.5 calendar days.

How does this compare to market benchmarks? According to StandOutCV data (December 2024), the average time-to-hire in the United Kingdom is just under five weeks. Government and public sector organizations take the longest to hire (around six weeks), while the HoReCa industry fills roles the fastest (in less than four weeks).

Average time-to-hire or median?

As with other time-based metrics, when your data set includes outliers, for example one recruitment taking 8 days and another 70, it is often better to use the median instead of the arithmetic mean. The median gives a more accurate picture of the typical time to hire, since it is not distorted by extreme values.

Using the median is especially helpful when:

• recruitment processes are running in parallel for very different positions (for example, a junior role and a C-level role);
• some recruitment processes were interrupted or artificially extended;
• you want to understand the typical hiring duration without the noise caused by outliers.

What is the difference between time-to-hire and time-to-fill?

The time-to-hire and time-to-fill metrics are often used interchangeably, but they actually refer to different parts of the recruitment process.

• Time-to-fill shows how long the entire process takes, starting from the decision to open a position and including the time needed to prepare and post the job ad, as well as wait for the first applications to arrive.
• Time-to-hire, on the other hand, measures the efficiency of the selection stage, the time from when a candidate enters the recruitment funnel to when they accept the offer.

For example, let’s say Company XYZ published a job ad on April 1, received the first application on April 8, and had the offer accepted on April 24. In this case, the time-to-fill is 23 days, while the time-to-hire is 16 days.

Both metrics are valuable, but they answer different questions. Time-to-fill reflects the total time cost of having an open position, while time-to-hire shows how efficiently the recruitment team operates once a candidate joins the process.

What influences the time-to-hire metric?

The main factors shaping the time-to-hire value include:

• Number and structure of recruitment stages – the more steps a hiring process has, the longer a candidate stays in the funnel. If several stages serve similar verification purposes, it may be worth consolidating them or changing their order.
• Clarity of criteria and decision-making speed – delays most often occur after interviews, when final decisions need to be agreed upon. When everyone on the hiring team uses the same evaluation criteria and knows the expected timeline for providing feedback, the process maintains a steady pace.
• Candidate fit in the hiring funnel – a vague job description or poorly chosen advertising channels can lead to a flood of applications that do not match the role requirements. Since screening these takes time and delays interviews with qualified candidates, it is worth regularly reviewing the effectiveness of your sourcing channels. This helps you focus your efforts and budget on the sources that attract the best-fit profiles, not just the highest volume of applications.
• Offer competitiveness – incomplete or unclear information about employment terms, work model, or start date often leads to additional questions and lengthy negotiations at the end of the selection process. A well-prepared job posting that includes all key details removes decision barriers and allows candidates to assess fit from the start. To make it even more effective, you can compare your offer with competing listings in the same industry before publishing.
• Decision-making approach within the organization – involving too many people in candidate evaluation often causes schedule changes and unnecessary revisiting of previously discussed issues. The situation worsens when roles are not clearly defined. It is better to designate one person responsible for the final decision, supported by a few subject-matter advisors. This approach shortens the approval path and reduces the risk of bottlenecks.
• Role characteristics and market conditions – the duration of recruitment largely depends on the level of specialization and market realities. For expert-level roles where competition for talent is strong, selection usually requires deeper assessment and more interviews. Seasonal factors also play a role, such as limited availability of participants, heavier project workloads, or vacation periods. Planning with these variables in mind helps prevent unnecessary delays.
• Communication with candidates – slow contact between stages, lack of information about next steps, or uncertainty about the recruitment status can lower engagement and increase the risk of losing candidates. Even a brief message confirming that a decision is in progress improves the experience and keeps motivation high. Consistent, predictable communication is an easy way to reduce drop-offs and shorten the overall process.
• Workflow and tools used – scattered communication, manually scheduling interviews, or lacking a shared space to track candidate progress slow down every stage. It helps to establish clear information-sharing rules and use integrated ATS systems that support automation and streamline coordination.

Why is the time-to-hire metric important?

A longer-than-average recruitment process does not automatically indicate inefficiency. Sometimes it simply reflects the need for a deeper assessment of candidates’ competencies or the specific nature of a role. The problem arises when the delay has no valid reason and results instead from organizational issues such as long gaps between stages, slow decision-making, or weak coordination within the hiring team.

In such cases, the organization faces several risks and losses:

Ironically, a drawn-out selection process can also lower the quality of hiring decisions, as growing pressure to fill the vacancy may lead to rushed choices. Hiring a poorly matched employee often results in turnover and another recruitment round, and every day of delay adds extra cost.

If your time-to-hire is increasing compared to previous periods or deviates from the standard for a given role without a clear reason, that’s a sign of potential bottlenecks. In that case, it’s worth analyzing individual recruitment stages, decision-making speed, and the quality of incoming applications to identify the cause of the delay and restore predictability to the process.

How to monitor time-to-hire in your organization

Tracking time-to-hire effectively requires putting a few best practices in place:

1. Keep your data in one system. Dispersed information in emails, spreadsheets, or personal notes makes analysis difficult. Use automation and generate reports without manual data collection.
2. Measure regularly and compare trends. Time-to-hire should be calculated on a regular basis, such as monthly or quarterly. Compare results across periods for selected roles and use industry benchmarks to identify changes over time.
3. Segment your data. Averaging time-to-hire for the entire organization can hide underlying issues. Analyze the metric separately for different job types and departments to spot where the biggest delays occur.
4. Track time between stages. Measure the intervals between specific recruitment steps to pinpoint which ones need optimization.
5. Use other HR metrics for context. Time-to-hire works best when viewed alongside complementary indicators, such as:
   • the offer acceptance rate, which shows whether the recruitment pace affects candidates’ final decisions;
   • the post-interview withdrawal rate, which signals when candidates lose interest;
   • source conversion, which helps assess whether incoming applications meet role requirements;
   • quality of hire, which confirms that faster recruitment does not come at the expense of hiring quality.
6. Share data with your team. A shared dashboard or regular summaries help build awareness and accountability for recruitment progress. When recruiters see that their feedback times are longer than others on the team, they can react quickly and make adjustments.

Consistent monitoring of time-to-hire will help you not only shorten the recruitment process but also improve the overall quality of hiring decisions.