HR’s response to the talent shortage? They wouldn’t do anything to the recruiting strategy that would increase the company’s current $700 cost per hire by $50. 

Meanwhile, the CEO pointed out the cost of not filling a position, one position, was roughly $19,000 per month in lost revenue. When I heard there were about 1,000 open positions at the company, my jaw dropped.

HR was worried about saving $50 per hire while the opportunity cost per hire was $19,000 per month. The business was losing hundreds of millions in revenue because it wasn’t making hires.  But… HR was keeping that cost per hire number under $700.  So, save tens of dollars and not make millions.

Empty Seats Are Costing You

If your recruiting efforts aren’t keeping pace with your organization’s workforce needs, it may be time to gain a better understanding of what the cost of not making a hire really is. What is that empty seat costing you? What’s that empty mechanic bay costing you? That unfilled nursing slot? The missing restaurant manager? Or that empty hairstylist chair?

In conclusion, if you are in talent acquisition or HR, knowing the cost of not making a hire can make you a rock star to your CEO. When you consider the actual financial impact and lost opportunity, you may find a lot more budget and support for recruiting by framing the problem around the cost of not filling positions. The fact is, unfilled jobs are throttling the growth of most companies, and that’s probably the case at your company, too. 

CEOs and CFOs get it.

###

If you are tired of lost hiring opportunities, let’s connect. I’d like to understand the issues your company is facing and how PivotCX can help. Let’s talk about your recruiting.