Nine in ten employers in the UK admit they have compromised on the quality of a hire because of time and market pressures, according to research by Hiring Hub.
The poll of 200 top decision-makers reveals 74% of those asked accept that a compromise culture in recruitment is unhealthy for an organisation.
The top perceived disadvantages of bad hires are: needing to invest further to develop a replacement (54%), impact on company performance (47%) and the burden on line managers when supporting new recruits (35%).
HR and recruitment departments appear to be aware of the benefits allocating more time to hires would bring, according to the survey. Two-thirds said spending more time on interviewing candidates would benefit the company.
More than half (52%) of those polled said they spent more time speaking to agencies and vetting CVs than on the interviewing process itself.
>See also: Avoiding bias in recruitment and promotion
Hiring Hub co-founder and CEO Simon Swan said that, if you run a business, hiring the wrong candidate can be a “costly mistake”.
However, HR professionals and business owners compromise on recruitment quality almost as a matter of routine,” he said.
“This is a Catch-22 for UK businesses that waste the little time they do have in finding a candidate they then have to replace, or dedicate more time line-managing in the long run. It’s ineffective and a huge drain on the company’s resources.”
Swan went on to call the current recruitment processes in the UK “convoluted, inefficient, and unsustainable”.
“We’re living in a digital age where innovative tools and techniques that enable us to be more efficient and competitive are at our disposal,” he said.
“By replacing improvisation with innovation, companies can reduce the time spent reviewing CVs and managing agencies, in order to focus on interviewing and selecting the right candidates to grow their business.”
Further reading: Workplace conflict – ready to mediate?