The person I responded to said that filling a role in 90 days would be "relatively quick" so you've already improved theoretical hiring efficiency by up to 50%.

But it still doesn't sound like a very effective process typed out like this.

▲

mattm 4 hours ago | parent [-]

I can't speak to their experience but the bigger the company, the more process and people involved usually. That causes delays here and there that add up. It's also a matter of how much of a priority the company makes it. If they're large and well-known there's really no incentive to change anything. They'll always have a stream of candidates applying and being available to hire.

What would you do to make it more effective?

	▲	sporadicism 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		So it's not that they can't, it's that they won't. Seems crazy to me. >What would you do to make it more effective? I'd ask companies who have managed to get the process down to 2-3 weeks what they're doing, and then do that. It sounds like you're saying they don't actually care to, though.