How to Reduce Time to Hire: Causes and Practical Fixes

Last updated: 21 September 2026 · By the Asuraa Team

What is time to hire, and how is it different from time to fill?

Time to hire is how long it takes to move a candidate through your process. Time to fill is how long the whole vacancy stays open. The two are related but they start at different points.

Recruiting software firms define them in slightly different ways, so pick one definition and use it consistently.

Time to fill therefore includes the internal steps before a job is even advertised, such as approvals and writing the brief. Time to hire mainly reflects how quickly your team screens, interviews and decides.

Should you compare your time to hire with a benchmark?

Use benchmarks with care. The sources above quote different averages, and some attribute their figure to a survey while others give no source, so they do not line up.

Workable itself notes that benchmarks vary by industry and that tracking your own numbers over time gives a more meaningful comparison. We therefore do not quote an industry average here. Measure your last five to ten hires per role type and treat that as your baseline.

Where do hiring delays come from?

HiBob names several common bottlenecks. They are useful as a checklist for your own process.

• Too few posting channels, so the role gets little visibility.
• Overwhelmed recruiters who cannot respond promptly.
• Hiring managers who are unavailable for interviews or feedback.
• Overly complex or high-touch hiring processes.
• Unclear job descriptions that attract unqualified applicants.
• Slow approval workflows for opening new positions.

To see which applies to you, log the date each candidate enters and leaves every stage for a few roles. The stage with the longest wait is your first target.

How to reduce time to hire: practical fixes

Work through these in order, starting with the stage your data shows is slowest.

1. Hold a kickoff before you post. iCIMS suggests a structured hiring kickoff meeting that clarifies the role, timeline and evaluation criteria for everyone involved. Our guide on how to write a job description helps with the brief.
2. Agree the screening criteria upfront. Write down what counts as a pass so reviewers do not debate it candidate by candidate. See how to screen candidates.
3. Cut steps that add little. Ask what each round tests, and merge or drop rounds that repeat each other.
4. Book interviewers early. Reserve panel slots before candidates are shortlisted and let candidates self-schedule where you can. iCIMS lists self-scheduling and video interviewing among its suggestions.
5. Set a feedback deadline. Agree that every interviewer submits scores within a set time, such as the same day or next working day. That timeframe is our suggestion, not a sourced figure.
6. Keep candidates informed. iCIMS recommends faster candidate communication on the channels they prefer, including SMS and social media.
7. Build a pipeline. Workable and iCIMS both suggest keeping a database of past applicants, sourcing passive candidates and using employee referrals.

Can structured interviews make hiring faster?

They can shorten the decision stage. When every interviewer asks the same questions and scores against a rubric, the debrief has a shared basis and takes less time.

Google's re:Work guide on structured interviewing reports that structured interviews save about 40 minutes per interview. That is Google's own finding, so treat it as an example of what is possible, not a promise for your team.

Should you rush a hire to cut the number?

No, and this is where many guides stop short. A lower number is only good if hire quality holds.

Track a quality signal next to speed, such as whether new hires pass probation or how managers rate them after a few months. Be careful with offers as well: pushing a candidate to decide in a day may hurt trust. If a shorter process means skipping structured criteria, the speed gain is not worth it.

What do most guides on how to reduce time to hire get wrong?

Most guides lead with software and averages. These are the gaps.

• They mix up the metrics. Cutting time to hire does not fix delays that happen before the job is posted.
• They quote benchmarks without context. A different definition or industry can make your number look better or worse than it is.
• They skip measurement. Without stage-by-stage dates, you are guessing where the delay sits.
• They ignore the hiring manager. Waiting on feedback is often a people problem, and a tool will not solve it alone.

FAQ

What is time to hire?

Time to hire is the time between a candidate applying (or entering your pipeline) and accepting an offer. It shows how quickly your team screens, interviews and decides. Sources define the start point slightly differently, so choose one definition and use it consistently.

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

Time to fill starts earlier, when the requisition is approved or the hiring manager makes the request, and ends when the offer is accepted or the hire starts. Time to hire starts when the candidate applies. Time to fill therefore includes internal approval and preparation.

What is a good time to hire?

There is no single good number. Sources quote different averages, and they vary by role and industry. Workable advises tracking your own figures over time, so compare each role type with your past hires and look for a steady fall without a drop in quality.

What causes a long time to hire?

HiBob lists too few posting channels, overwhelmed recruiters, unavailable hiring managers, complicated processes, unclear job descriptions and slow approvals. Log the dates candidates spend in each stage for a few roles, and the slowest stage will usually point to the main cause.

How can startups reduce time to hire?

Keep the process short, agree criteria before posting, and book interviews quickly. Decide who owns each decision and set a feedback deadline. Startups often have fewer approval layers, so the main gains come from clear briefs and fast interviewer feedback.

Does reducing time to hire lower hire quality?

It can if you skip assessment to save time. Protect quality by keeping structured criteria and tracking a quality signal, such as probation outcomes, alongside speed. Remove waiting time and repeated rounds first, not the checks that tell you whether the candidate can do the job.

Final thoughts

A faster process comes from finding where candidates wait and removing that wait. Define your metric, measure each stage, fix the slowest one, and check that quality holds.

Asuraa.in's long-term vision is to make hiring simple, fast and accessible, and you can read more on the about page.