If you had to pick the “one” measure of the recruiting function, what would you pick?
It’s a direct, somewhat provoking question posted to the CXR Leadership eXchange recently and one that got us thinking. (And plenty of our members too!) The goal of determining the “one best” TA metric is admirable – whether it can be achieved and how to do that is where the discussion gets interesting.
Time, Cost, or Quality
If you’ve spent any time in TA you know that business leaders and finance-minded TA or HR leaders are going to hone in on Cost per Hire or Time to Fill (or to Find… or to Offer…). Quality of Hire might make more sense as one metric on which to focus. Though more ambiguous on the surface, it can be quantitatively defined – particularly within an organization – making it the standard against which TA is measured. Set up some performance and feedback scores throughout the first year and end it with the ultimate question: would you hire this person again.
Who’s your audience?
The ultimate recruiting metric might depend more on who is reviewing it. As Rob McIntosh has noted in his efforts to better define Recruiting Metrics, there are four categories of standard recruiting metrics:
- Speed Metrics
- Quality Metrics
- Productivity Metrics
- Cost Metrics
Your c-suite might want to focus on cost metrics while your Talent Management and Talent Acquisition leaders are more concerned with productivity metrics. After listening to the discussion on the Leadership eXchange, we’re not sure there’s a one-size-fits-all answer here. But we do think the discussion is extremely beneficial in helping each organization hone in on the metrics that really matter for them.
CXR Leaders are encouraged to log in to the site and participate in this discussion in the eXchange. It’s no coincidence that within days of this post a similar thread was started in the Analytics eXchange asking how metrics are grouped together and shared with the business. Data is a hot topic and more and more leaders are conquering the difference between tracking productivity versus activity!