Episode Key Takeaways
Average time-to-hire is statistically misleading. Because hiring timelines aren’t symmetric—some roles fill in hours, others in years—the mean obscures the typical experience. Tyler Weeks recommends using the 80th percentile instead: the time it takes to fill 80% of your roles, just like how you’d describe your commute as ‘typically 30 minutes,’ not an average that includes the rare two-hour traffic jam.
Time to respond matters more than time to fill. Most TA metrics focus on the one person hired, leaving you blind to the experience of the 99% who don’t get the job. Measuring how long candidates wait for meaningful communication—not just automated confirmations—reveals whether your process is actually candidate-centric or just optimised for the hire.
Onboarding and offer acceptance are part of your hiring pipeline, not someone else’s problem. Quick quits and no-shows, especially in frontline roles, signal that the candidate experience broke somewhere between offer and day one. Treating recruitment as one continuous experience from application through first weeks of employment directly impacts retention and reduces the costly cycle of re-hiring.
Automation isn’t better by default—it’s just faster. When implementing chatbots or AI-driven workflows, the critical question isn’t whether it’s efficient; it’s whether it matches your company’s tone and values. For a hospitality brand, that means the bot should feel like engaging with a front desk, not a generic ticketing system.
Apply sports analytics to recruiting team performance. Instead of measuring individual contributors by candidates sourced or hires closed, use impact ratings—similar to plus-minus in basketball—to see how each role (sourcer, coordinator, recruiter) affects hiring manager satisfaction or candidate experience. This reveals the true value of support functions that don’t directly close roles.
Frequently
Asked
Questions
Why is average time-to-hire a bad metric?
Average assumes a symmetric distribution, but hiring timelines aren’t. You’ll have roles filled in hours and others in months or years. A role filled in one day and another in three years averages to 1.5 years—but nobody experienced that. Use the 80th percentile instead to capture the typical experience.
What should I measure instead of time to fill?
Time to respond: how long before a candidate receives meaningful communication (interview invite, disposition, next step)—not just an automated confirmation. This captures the bulk of your candidate experience, not just the one person hired. It often reveals gaps invisible in time-to-fill metrics.
How do I know if my TA tech stack is working?
Look at the relationship between TA systems and upstream processes: finance approval workflows, headcount planning, and hiring manager expectations. If managers are frustrated before the requisition opens, the problem isn’t TA—it’s the approval process. Also measure downstream: onboarding experience and quick-quit rates signal whether your hiring pipeline actually ends at offer or extends through day one.
How should I think about AI and automation in recruiting?
Automation isn’t inherently better—it’s faster. The question is whether it matches your company’s tone and values. For hospitality, a chatbot should feel like a front desk interaction. For a software company, it might feel more technical. Ensure seamless, unified experiences rather than multiple disconnected bots across platforms.
How do I measure the impact of sourcers and coordinators?
Use impact ratings: compare hiring manager satisfaction, candidate experience scores, or conversion ratios with and without that person’s involvement. This reveals how support roles enhance the process beyond just candidate volume or hire count, giving credit to functions that improve experience but don’t directly close roles.