There are many different metrics to track when assessing a recruiting team’s strengths, but which ones will help you build a stronger recruiting team and better support business objectives? Which ones tell you how long a candidate remains in your funnel before they accept another offer or lose interest in the application? Which ones pinpoint where you find the best talent?
Measuring recruitment KPIs is vital to understanding which talent acquisition strategies are succeeding and which need adjusting.
1. Time to Hire
Time to hire, the time between when a candidate enters an ATS to when they receive an offer, is one of the easier metrics to measure. While time to fill measures how long a position remains open, time to hire measures the efficiency of the recruiting process including applications, screenings, and interviews.
It can reveal many systemic problems in your hiring process. If it takes weeks or months to extend an offer, consider how much time is spent screening and interviewing or how long hiring managers take to make a decision.
Why It Matters
Depending on the industry, average time to fill can range from 14 to 63 days (See individual industry’s time to fill in this eBook). A slow time to hire can harm an organization in several ways. While productivity and revenue are the most obvious issues, it also affects your employer brand and more importantly the quality of your hires. While your recruiters are still conducting phone screens and scheduling interviews, your competition could be giving great candidates an offer.
A slow time to hire could also impact hire quality. Your best candidates will drop out of an application that they don’t feel respects their skills or time. If candidates begin an application but few finish it, consider what information you’re asking for or how many steps are involved. If they’re dropping out halfway through your assessment it may be time to review its length or accuracy.
2. Quality of Hire
Quality of hire is an elusive metric, but one that can reveal many insights about your recruiting process.
Measure the quality of your hires through performance and retention data as well as how they add to and fit with the company culture. If recruiters and hiring managers are pulling in what look like great hires who leave within the first six months, it’s possible that they’re screening for the wrong traits and aren’t surfacing the best candidates.
Why It Matters
Measuring quality of hire can help identify not only how well your recruiters are performing but also where they find their best candidates — whether it’s from social media, online job boards, or word of mouth references. It can reveal what kinds of candidates become your strongest performers, and what screening methods surfaced these candidates.
3. Sourcing Channel Efficiency
This metric deals with where your candidates come from. It tells you whether candidates come from campuses or job boards, or which social channels source the best applicants. Thanks to a variety of tools like Google or Facebook Analytics, as well as internal ATS surveys, it’s easier to find out where exactly candidates are entering the pipeline and how long they’re staying in it.
Why It Matters
Track this metric to understand where your best candidates come from and what kinds of postings pique their interest. Do they respond to videos that show off company culture or do they look for articles about the important work the company does? If more great candidates enter the pipeline through a social media site than a job board, review why job board postings aren’t attracting the right applicants.
Tracking these sources gives insight into what candidates look for when they apply to your company and helps you better position your employer brand.
4. Adverse Impact
Adverse impact presents in a screening process that is biased against protected classes. Evaluate for Adverse Impact with the “four-fifths rule.”
This rule states that bias exists within the hiring process if a protected class, such as women, are hired at a less than 80-percent (4/5ths) rate compared to the demographic with the highest selection rate. The ramifications of adverse impact are felt at every future step of the hiring process and will manifest in a less diverse workforce.
When measuring for adverse impact, look beyond typical demographics you’d measure for compliance requirements in an AAP report, such as minority groups. When checking for adverse impact consider other protected classes, such as workers over 40. You may not be mandated to track these classes, but doing so will provide a much better understanding of biases in your hiring process.
Why It Matters
Workforce diversity has proven correlations with increased happiness and employee performance, so it’s important to make sure that the selection methods you use do not inadvertently screen out a protected group.
If you discover adverse impact (for example only 25% of disabled applicants pass a screening) audit your entire recruiting process to see what causes it. Ensure that your screening approaches aren’t accidentally biased. Check to see where recruiters source candidates and find more diverse sources of talent. It may be as simple as not screening out candidates with employment gaps or as complex as sourcing from more diverse talent pools.
5. Candidate Experience
The candidate experience encompasses the entire hiring process: from how a candidate finds and becomes interested in a position, to their application and interviews, to receiving an offer or being dispositioned out of the pool. A poor candidate experience could indicate a slow screening or application process, that candidates don’t feel they are able to accurately demonstrate their abilities, or an impersonal tone from the recruiting team.
Why It Matters
The consequences of a poor candidate experience go beyond simply losing great candidates. According to the Talent Board, 41% of candidates who gave their experience the lowest rating said they would take their business elsewhere. These candidates will also be less likely to recommend positions to their own networks, narrowing the total pool of applicants.
The candidate experience is often tracked through a survey to gauge the application’s Net Promoter Score. Best practices from high NPS companies suggest implementing a survey after each step in the hiring process. Assessing after each step not only creates a more holistic view of the candidate experience but helps identify specific bottlenecks in the recruiting process.
Track all of these metrics in concert to build a stronger recruiting process. Assessing your time to hire, quality of hire, and sourcing channels to hire the best candidates faster. Track for adverse impact to improve diversity, and find out what candidates like and dislike about the process to identify what efforts you should sustain and what you need to improve.