Hiring managers often feel pulled between two pressures: move quickly or hold out for the perfect candidate. Neither extreme usually ends well.
Consider this scenario. The candidate pool is limited, but someone comes along who meets 85 percent of the organization’s needs. The interview goes well. The candidate appears capable, interested and aligned with the team. Yet the employer says, “It was great talking with you. We have a few other people to meet, and we’ll be in touch.”
Sometimes that is part of a thoughtful process. Other times, the employer wants to keep looking just in case a perfect candidate appears. Meanwhile, that strong candidate remains on the market. Another employer may recognize what they bring and make an offer. Two weeks turn into four, then eight, and the original position is still open. The elusive unicorn never arrives.
The opposite situation can be just as costly. An employer is so uncomfortable having a position open that filling the chair becomes the goal. Warning signs are explained away. Gaps in skills or experience are minimized. Questions about whether the person will thrive in the organization are brushed aside. The employer hires through rose-colored glasses and hopes everything will work itself out.
That is not strategic speed. It is panic wearing a recruiting hat.
So where is the balance? There is no universal number of days that works for every company or position. Each organization must decide how much time and flexibility a search requires. A better starting point is to change how hiring success is measured.
Time-to-fill can be useful operational data, but it should not be the primary definition of success. A position filled in 10 days is not a win if the employee struggles, disrupts the team or leaves within three months. Employers should also consider how well the person performs, whether they stay, how they grow and whether they deliver the results the role was created to achieve.
SHRM recently described this shift as “precision over scale”, focusing recruiting efforts on finding talent suited to the organization’s needs instead of simply increasing speed, activity or applicant volume.
Precision starts before the job is posted. Hiring managers and recruiters need to agree on the position’s true must-have qualifications. What must the person know on day one? What can be learned within a reasonable period? Which competencies directly affect performance, safety, service or business results? Which qualifications are simply preferences because a previous employee happened to possess them?
That conversation requires honesty. An unrealistic wish list narrows the candidate pool before recruiting begins. It can also cause employers to reject strong people who bring transferable skills, sound judgment and the ability to learn. A candidate who meets 85 percent of the requirements may be highly successful if the remaining 15 percent can be developed. A candidate who looks perfect on paper may still lack the interpersonal skills or judgment the role requires.
When decision-makers say, “They are almost perfect, but let’s keep looking,” the hiring team should identify the specific concern. Is the person truly not a fit? Are expectations for someone entering the position unrealistic? Have leaders failed to agree on what the organization needs? Or is the role itself no longer designed around the work that needs to be done?
Extending the search without answering those questions rarely creates clarity. It does increase the chance of losing a qualified candidate. As I have written before, a hiring process that moves at a sloth’s pace risks losing talented people. Strong candidates are not products waiting patiently on a shelf.
Employers should also look inside the organization before assuming every opening requires an external search. An existing employee may be ready for additional responsibility, especially when the move offers meaningful professional growth. The organization can then recruit for the more junior role, which may attract a larger pool of qualified candidates.
Effective hiring is neither a race nor a quest for perfection. It is a disciplined decision based on clearly defined needs, relevant evidence and realistic expectations. The goal is to know what good looks like, recognize it when it appears and move forward before a strong candidate becomes someone else’s great hire.
Monica Blackwood is the President and CEO of West Sound Workforce, a locally owned staffing firm serving employers and job seekers throughout the Puget Sound region. West Sound Workforce provides temporary, temp-to-hire, and direct-hire staffing services with a focus on alignment, performance, and long-term success.
