How to calculate time-to-fill
Time-to-fill = Date of offer acceptance - Date job requisition was approved. For example, if a role is approved on March 1 and a candidate accepts on March 28, the time-to-fill is 27 days. Some organisations measure from the date the job is posted externally rather than the requisition approval date — it is important to be consistent in which starting point you use.
Time-to-fill is often confused with time-to-hire, though they measure different things. Time-to-hire typically measures from the date a specific candidate enters the pipeline (applies or is sourced) to their offer acceptance. This measures how efficiently the organisation evaluates a known candidate, while time-to-fill measures the entire process including sourcing.
Industry benchmarks
Average time-to-fill varies significantly by role type, industry, and seniority. According to SHRM (Society for Human Resource Management), the overall average across industries is approximately 36-44 days. Technology roles tend to be longer (often 40-60 days due to technical assessment stages), while high-volume roles like retail or hospitality can be filled in under 20 days.
For recruitment agencies, time-to-fill benchmarks vary by specialisation. Contingency agencies typically aim for 20-30 days for professional roles. Executive search engagements have longer expected timelines, often 8-16 weeks, reflecting the depth of the search process. Contract and temporary staffing operates on much shorter cycles, sometimes filling roles within days.
What affects time-to-fill
The largest controllable factor is the speed of the feedback loop between recruiter and hiring manager. Roles where hiring managers respond to candidate submissions within 24-48 hours fill significantly faster than those where feedback takes a week or more. Interview scheduling delays are another common bottleneck — difficulty coordinating calendars can add days or weeks to the process.
The clarity of the role brief also matters. Roles with well-defined requirements, realistic salary expectations, and clear decision criteria move faster through the pipeline because recruiters source more accurately and fewer candidates are rejected at late stages. Roles where requirements shift mid-process, or where multiple stakeholders have conflicting priorities, tend to have extended time-to-fill.
Market conditions play a role too. In-demand skills with limited supply (currently common in AI, cybersecurity, and data engineering) naturally have longer time-to-fill because candidates have more options and the sourcing pool is smaller.
Strategies to reduce time-to-fill
Building and maintaining talent pools for frequently recurring roles allows agencies to present candidates within days of a role opening, rather than starting sourcing from scratch. AI-powered matching can accelerate the initial screening phase by automatically surfacing the most relevant candidates from existing databases.
Streamlining the interview process — reducing unnecessary rounds, using structured interview formats, and enabling asynchronous video interviews — removes calendar bottlenecks. Client portals that allow hiring managers to review and provide feedback on candidates with a single click close the feedback loop faster than email-based communication.
Reducing application friction is an often-overlooked factor. If a significant portion of candidates abandon the application process, the recruiter's sourcing pool shrinks and more time is spent finding replacements. Simplified, mobile-friendly application flows with CV-first design retain more candidates and keep the pipeline full.