I could not resist commenting on Don's comments about capital creation thru "Time to Hire" improvements. While I certainly agree with his premise I do feel there are bigger fish to fry so to speak.

 

Time to hire metrics is a valuable tool to ensure one capitalizes on lost opportunity costs. However in each transaction (hire) it is a static revenue generator (average return per employee times days left unfilled). In essence per transaction a one time benefit. Valuable but not dynamic! It lacks the power of compound and exponential benefits.

 

"Quality per hire" is a dynamic metric that will focus an organization on hiring the 20% pool of candidates that produce 80% of the results. Which we both know is at a minimum more like 10% creating 90%! Not only do you get the compound benefit EVERY year that employee is at your firm but you also get the exponential benefit of these high achievers attracting and developing others like themselves. This kind be mind numbing when you run the numbers and realize the capitol creation potential inherent.

 

Intuitively department heads know this and judge vendors more by this metric then any other. They are best positioned to judge the performance of the candidates hired and can see the compound and exponential benefits these high achievers create.

 

While time to hire and cost per hire are important we intuitively know that quality per hire is the measure that the real client will be most influenced by. Unfortunately it is also the most difficult for HR to get their arms around.

 

When internal HR functions focus on this metric then they will put themselves in line with the clients they serve at their companies.