Hiring Process Getting Longer, Recruiters Say (2)

SHRM Logo

by Roy Mauer

Longer time-to-hire coupled with growing competition for skilled candidates is holding companies back from filling needed roles, according to a recent survey of talent acquisition professionals.

Nearly three-quarters (71 percent) of 446 recruiters surveyed by global executive search organization MRINetwork said candidates typically receive a job offer three to six weeks after the first interview, compared to the one to four weeks that was cited in previous years of the biannual survey.

Another 19 percent said it takes seven weeks or longer from the first interview for candidates to get an offer. And average time-to-fill is at 63 business days—21 more days than it was five years ago, according to separate data from global research and technology company CEB, based in Arlington, Va.

“An extensive, drawn-out approach to hiring is a protective measure that many companies have kept from the recession, but it is no longer effective to recruit top candidates who expect a swifter process,” said Nysha King, media relations lead for MRINetwork, based in Philadelphia. “This is particularly the case in the executive, managerial and professional labor market, which has become increasingly candidate-driven since 2011 and in 2015 reached an all-time high.”

Ninety percent of recruiters feel the current market is candidate-driven, according to the survey.

The lengthier hiring process is a result of the tightening job market, believes Karen Russo, president of executive search and HR consulting firm K. Russo Consulting, an affiliate of Sanford Rose Associates, based in the New York City area. “The demand for talent is on the rise, and yet many clients feel there is a lack of quality candidates in the candidate pool,” Russo said. “Hence they take more time waiting to see more candidates or don’t feel satisfied when they don’t see the perfect match. Some industries suffer more than others, like health care and financial services—even the trades are operating at a talent deficit.”

View full article here on SHRM.org>>