HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt,...

54
The HealthcareSource User Conference November 6-9, 2016 JW MARRIOTT • WASHINGTON, DC HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY 2016 – FIRST EDITION Deb Vargovick Senior Consultant – Lean Human Capital HealthcareSource

Transcript of HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt,...

Page 1: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

The HealthcareSource User ConferenceNovember 6-9, 2016JW MARRIOTT • WASHINGTON, DC

HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY2016 – FIRST EDITION Deb VargovickSenior Consultant – Lean Human CapitalHealthcareSource

Page 2: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

JOIN THE CONVERSATION

• Be sure to tweet and post what you’ve learned in this presentation!- Twitter: @quality_talent - Instagram: @healthcaresource- #TalentSymposium16

• Attendees that are active on social media will be entered to win FUN prizes during the conference!

Page 3: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

ABOUT DEB VARGOVICK• A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment

professional.

• Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining processes for The Disney Store division and Walt Disney World Resorts merchandise division.

• Most of her career, led large, operational teams for Fortune 500 organizations such as The Walt Disney Company, The Gap, Borders Group Inc. and Best Buy.

• Most recently, led the Henry Ford Health System’s Talent Acquisition team through a centralization restructure and the introduction of a new sourcing model.

• Helped define the new organizational structure, trained 30 recruiters on new processes, and implemented a Lean program to continuously assess and eliminate waste in the recruitment process.

Page 4: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

FOUNDATION OF OUR RESEARCH / INTELLIGENCE

Lean Human Capital Healthcare Community |

Recruitment Metrics Benchmark Study

650+ hospitals have participated in our Recruitment Metrics Benchmark Study over the last 7 years.

Page 5: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

COMMUNITY | BENCHMARK STUDY PARTICIPANTS 2010 - 2016

Page 6: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

FOUNDATION OF OUR BENCHMARK STUDY VOICE OF THE CUSTOMER

What do Hiring Manager and key stakeholders expect from

you?

Page 7: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

CRITICAL VOC PERFORMANCE DIMENSIONS CAN’T MANAGE WHAT YOU DON’T MEASURE

VOC—“I want a cost effective recruitment solution that provides high quality candidates as quickly and efficiently as possible.”

Cost

Quality of Service Quality of Hire

Efficiency andProductivity

Responsivenessand Speed

Page 8: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

2016 STUDY – PERFORMANCE METRICSSix Key Dimensions – Based on VOC

Responsiveness: Time-to-Fill / Time-to-Start

(with breakdown by internal & external hires)

TTF & % of positions filled in more/less than 60 days

% of positions currently open over 60 days

Key metrics provided for 8 different groups:

o Overall, Direct Care RNs, PT/OT/SLP, IS/IT Professionals, NICU/OR/PACU/ICU/ER RNs, Nurse Practitioners, CNOs/Nurse Managers, ICD-9 & ICD-10 Medical Coders

Customer Satisfaction: Hiring Manager, New Hire & Non

Hired Applicant

Cost: Cost Per Hire

Recruitment Cost Ratio

Efficiency: Applications to Positions Filled

Applicants Routed to Positions Filled

% of Positions filled from Extended Offers

Quality: 90 Day Turnover Rate.

First Year Turnover Rate

Breakdown by FT/PT & Contingent/Per Diem

Productivity: Overall & Direct Care RN Vacancy

Rate

Staff Productivity – Total Positions Filled per Recruitment Staff FTE

Employee Referral %

Openings per Recruiter

Page 9: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

OVERVIEW – 2016 | FIRST EDITION

7th Year of Study - Over 650 hospitals from 200+ different health systems.

2015 Annual Aggregate Data Information:

o 556,000 FTE employees (73% increase)!

o Processed over 5.3 million applicants (112% increase).

o Routed over 1 million candidates to hiring managers (53% increase).

o Filled over 200,000 positions (57% increase).

o 64% are academic/teaching facilities.

o 62% have achieved Magnet status.

Data Broken down by Size of Organization:

o Small: 0-5999 FTE employees

o Medium: 6000-14,999

o Large: 15,000 +

Page 10: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

INTERESTING OBSERVATIONS

Page 11: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

2016 – INTERESTING OBSERVATIONS

% that said YES 2016 2015 2014Has the average number of recruitment

staff increased, decreased or remained the same year over year?

77% 33% 44%

Has the average number of open requisitions increased, decreased, or remained the same year over year?

82% 89% 64%

Do you have a sourcing function within your organization?

59% (80% of large)

45% (58% of large)

33% (45% of large)

Does your organization have a centralized (recruiters report to single recruitment

leader) structure?

72%(80% of large)

64% (58% of large)

52% (53% of large)

Page 12: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

2016 HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY

Page 13: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

“Metrics are Meaningless, What You Do with Them is Priceless!”

Page 14: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

STORY BEHIND THE NUMBERS

• Responsiveness and Speed

• Process Efficiency

• Cost

• Staff Productivity

• Quality of Hire

• Quality Service/Customer Satisfaction

Page 15: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

RESPONSIVENESS/SPEED

Why Is Speed So Important?

Page 16: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

IMPACT SPEED HAS ON THE ORGANIZATION

Why reduce the time to hire and onboard a new employee?

• Employee Morale/Engagement

• Improve Customer Satisfaction (hiring manager, new hire, non-hired).

• Patient Safety/Satisfaction

• Reduce Turnover (and cost associated with it)

• Revenue lost from not being able to provide patient services.

• Reduce Cost of Vacancy!

Page 17: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

YEAR OVER YEAR CHANGES! OVERALL - 2015 Study OVERALL - 2016 Study

Mean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25Average TTF - Internal 41 45 41 35 43 49 43 37Average TTF - External 46 50 45 42 52 55 51 44Average Time-to-Fill (TTF) - Overall 49 51 45 41 48 52 47 43Average TTS - Internal 61 65 60 55 63 70 61 55Average TTS - External 77 83 77 72 77 82 75 69Average Time-to-Start (TTS) - Overall 69 75 72 61 73 79 71 66% of Positions Filled in LESS than 60 days - Overall 74% 70% 75% 79% 72% 70% 72% 77%Ave TTF - Positions Filled in LESS than 60 days - Overall 24 26 24 22 22 24 23 21% of Positions Filled in 60 days or MORE - Overall 26% 30% 25% 21% 28% 30% 28% 23%Ave TTF - Positions Filled in 60 Days or MORE - Overall 115 122 112 107 115 123 116 113

In future Benchmark Studies, we are seeking to capture new insights related to: Cycle time between steps in process (Approval to Post, post to candidate routed, Route to

Interview, etc.) The time a hiring need is identified to time new employee is on the job (full lifecycle)!

Page 18: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

EXPERIENCE VS NON-EXPERIENCE LEAN RECRUITMENT TRANSFORMATION JOURNEY MEMBERS!

More than 1 year Transformation Journey

Less than 1 year Transformation Journey

Mean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25Average TTF - Internal 41 49 43 41 44 49 44 38Average TTF - External 47 46 40 37 54 57 53 48Average Time-to-Fill (TTF) - Overall 45 52 44 42 49 53 50 44Average TTS - Internal 58 66 58 54 65 70 62 57Average TTS - External 74 80 71 67 79 83 75 71Average Time-to-Start (TTS) - Overall 68 74 67 64 75 79 71 68% of Positions Filled in LESS than 60 days - Overall 74% 71% 77% 79% 71% 70% 72% 76%Ave TTF - Positions Filled in LESS than 60 days - Overall 22 23 22 20 23 25 23 21% of Positions Filled in 60 days or MORE - Overall 26% 29% 23% 21% 29% 30% 28% 24%Ave TTF - Positions Filled in 60 Days or MORE - Overall 114 119 114 111 116 126 117 114

Interesting Observations: By leaning out processes, Experienced Transformation Organizations (ETOs) fill jobs on

average 6 days faster. With that said, they still struggle to fill 23% of their positions in less than 114 days.

Page 19: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

Ave TTF

47 (45) days

72% (75%) < 60 Days

116 (112) days23 (24) days

28% (25%) > 60 Days

7+ hours sourcing perCandidate route to HM for

consideration

Organizations underestimate time required to outbound source and

pipeline candidates for difficult to fill positions.

3 of every 10 positions take on average 116 (Top 25% is 2 of every 10 positions take on average 113 (107)

days to fill). These positions have a significant negative impact on Cost of Vacancy, patient safety/experience, clinical outcomes and

employee engagement.

STRUCTURAL FLAW IN ORGANIZATIONAL MODELOVERALL BENCHMARK – 2016 (2015)

Zero time sourcing per candidate routed to HM for

consideration for a Business as Usual Position

© 1997 – 2016, Lean Human Capital, LLC

Page 20: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

REDUCING TTF & ELIMINATING INVENTORY -CDV REQUISITIONS

Reduce Turnover

o Analyze 90 day Turnover on quarterly basis using a Turnover tool to capture reason for leaving, department, recruiter name, job title, type of hire (dept. hire vs recruiter recommendation) and recruiter feedback to gain insights into hiring trends and patterns. Create action plans with TA Leadership, HR Generalists, Compensation

Requisition/Position Control:

o Validate all positions (90+ days old) are still needed, core and realistic to fill.

Perform on bi-monthly basis.

o Implement a requisition cancellation policy if no engagement/activity from Hiring Manager.

Industry best practice is 90-120 days.

Requisition Management:

o Lean Process Improvement (Lean Interview scheduling, etc.).

o Rigorous use of analytics (aging & stuck position reports) to ensure a lean, efficient process and removal of bottlenecks/wait time.

Weekly is ideal, bi-monthly at a minimum.

Proactive Candidate Sourcing:

o Building candidate pipelines for CDV requisitions through Candidate Relationship Management (CRM).

Based on Hiring Demand.

Page 21: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

COST OF VACANCY IMPACTRETURN ON INVESTMENT BY REDUCING TTF – CASE STUDY

Total Costs - CY2015GROSS COSTS

Direct Care RNs

NET COSTS Direct Care RNs (50% Premium for OT; 107% Premium

for Agency)

Overtime $26,983,445 $17,326,483 Agency $20,132,865 $10,384,922 Totals $27,711,405

INVEST in sourcing to reduce Cost of Vacancy

Page 22: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

ALLOCATING THE RIGHT # OF RESOURCES FOR SOURCING – STAFFING OPTIMIZATION METHODOLOGY

Recruitment Process Time Study BAU CDV# of Hours for Each Category

# of Hours Needed per

Hire

# of Hours for Each Category

# of Hours Needed per

HireTime spent sourcing, pre-qualifying and routing a single candidate to the

hiring manager 1.00 5.00 8.00 40.00Time spent managing the hiring manager interview process (setting up

interview, getting feedback, etc.) for each interviewee 0.25 0.75 0.25 0.75Time spent developing/delivering offer, receiving feedback, etc. for each

offeree 0.50 0.56 1.00 1.11Time spent pre-boarding candidate (paperwork, credentialing, keeping

candidate warm, etc.) for each hire 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25Total Recruitment Process Hours to Hire 1 Candidate 6.56 42.11

Administrative Process Time Study BAU CDV# of Hours for Each Category

# of Hours Needed per

Hire

# of Hours for Each Category

# of Hours Needed per

HireTime spent managing the hiring manager interview process (setting up

interview, getting feedback, etc.) for each interviewee 0.50 1.50 0.50 1.50Time spent pre-boarding candidate (paperwork, credentialing, keeping

candidate warm, etc.) for each hire 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50Total Administrative Time to Hire 1 Candidate 4.00 4.00

Recruitment Resource Planning/Allocation SLA Days 365 SLA Days 365BAU CDV

# of Hires 100 100# of Sourcing/Pre Qual/Routing Hours Required 500 4,000 2.6

# of Interview/Offer/Hire Process Hours Required 156 211Total Recruitment Process Hours 656 4,211

# of FTE Recruiters Required to Meet Hiring Objectives 0.4 2.7# of Interview/Hire Process Hours Required by Admin 400 400

# of FTE Admins Personnel Required to Meet Hiring Objectives 0.3 0.3

Page 23: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

BEING FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE

Page 24: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

Why Is It important?

• Show how you contribute to one of the top 3 initiatives of your health system

• Cost savings will allow you to invest $ in value added resources (training, sourcing tools, etc.)

Page 25: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

YEAR OVER YEAR CHANGES! OVERALL - 2015 Study OVERALL - 2016 Study

Mean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25

COST METRICS

Total Cost Per Hire $ 939 $ 1,181 $

837 $

648 $

842 $

987 $

627 $

491

Total Recruitment Cost Ratio 1.5% 1.8% 1.8% 1.3% 1.9% 1.9% 1.9% 1.5%

Interesting Observations: Based on increase in hiring volume, Cost Per Hire has gone down. Recruitment Cost Ratio (RCR) remains dangerously low. When you compare internal RCR (1.9%) to cost of an RPO (5-10%) or search firm (20-30%), it is amazing

how well internal recruitment teams perform given the lack of capital investment? If we doubled the investment to 3.9%, this would still be HALF of what an average RPO would cost. THIS IS A POWERFUL METRICS THAT NEEDS TO BE SHARED WITH YOUR EXECUTIVE LEADERS!

Page 26: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

EXPERIENCE VS NON-EXPERIENCE RECRUITMENT TRANSFORMATION JOURNEY MEMBERS!

1+ Year Transformation Journey Less than 1 year Transformation Journey

Mean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25

COST METRICS

Total Cost Per Hire $ 935 $ 1,098 $ 903 $ 644 $ 807 $ 900 $ 606 $ 469

Total Recruitment Cost Ratio 1.8% 1.8% 2.1% 1.7% 1.9% 1.9% 1.6% 1.5%

Interesting Observations: ETO’s have gained key stakeholder support to invest more $ in recruitment! (Although the

investment is still ridiculously low!) Remember – Top 25% is not a good place to be with this metric!

Page 27: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

INVESTING IN RECRUITMENT TO REDUCE DIRECT COST OF TURNOVER - CASE STUDY

Assumptions CASE STUDY # of external new employees hired (projected for CY2015) 5800

Turnover % 20.1%Total number of replacement employees 1166

Average annual compensation $ 57,000 Average tax and benefit cost as % of salary (25% is average) 25%

Average loaded hourly admin labor costs $ 19 Average loaded hourly HR/recruiter labor costs $ 45

Average loaded hourly hiring manager labor costs $ 60 Average time spent by HR manager for exit interviews 0

Average time spent by admin for termination processing 120Separation pay (# of weeks offered) $ -

Time spent Sourcing to find one candidate for a difficult to fill positions 5Average # of applications received to fill 1 position 22

Average time spent dispositioning applicants 2Average # of candidates Pre-screened by Recruiting/HR 7.24Average time spent by HR Phone/Interview candidates 30

Cost pre pre-assessment test (manpower) $ 6 Average # of candidates routed to Hiring Managers for consideration 5

Average # of candidates interviewed by hiring manager to fill 1 position 3.04Average time spent by hiring manager interviewing candidates 60Average time spent by HR to creating/deliver/processing offers 60

Cost per source of hire (media, posting, agency, etc.) $ 788 Background check/drug/medical exam costs per hire $ 531

Average candidate travel costs per hire $ -Moving expenses $ -

Post offer onboarding admin expenses 120 Average sign on bonus per hire $ -

# of hours spent in formal training/onboarding per new hire. 8 Learning curve - # of months to full ramp up 2

Lost productivity % during learning curve period 50%

TURNOVER CATEGORIES CASE STUDY Separation Costs

Total labor costs for exit interviewer's time $ -Total admin labor costs for termination processing $ 43,671

Total separation pay $ -Total separation costs across all replaced employees $ 43,671

Recruitment Replacement CostsTotal costs - source of hire $ 918,650

Total Labor Costs to source candidates $ 1,311,525 Total labor costs to disposition all applicants $ 38,471 Total labor cost for pre-screening candidates $ 189,909

Total pre-assessment testing costs $ 48,532 Total labor cost for hiring manager interviews $ 212,642

Total labor cost for HR/recruiter to create/deliver offer $ 52,461 Total recruitment replacement costs $ 2,772,191

Onboarding Replacement CostsBackground check/drug/medical exam costs per hire $ 619,040

Average candidate travel costs per hire $ -Moving expenses $ -

Post offer onboarding admin expenses $ 43,671 Average sign on bonus per hire $ -

Total Onboarding Costs $ 662,711

Total Training CostsNew hire labor costs during Training/onboarding $ 319,474

Total learning curve costs $ 6,921,938 Total Training Costs $ 7,241,412

TOTAL TURNOVER COSTS $ 10,719,984

% decrease in Turnover Rate 23.5%Median First year TO Rate 15.4%

Total savings from reduction in turnover $ 2,519,196

Page 28: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

PROCESS EFFICIENCY

Why Is It So Important?

Page 29: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

STAFFING PROCESS EFFICIENCY SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENTWhy is a Lean Staffing Process so important?

• Thousands of hours are wasted on non-value added, non-revenue producing staffing activities.

• The time, money and resources deployed to handle ‘waste’ strangles your ability to work on value added activities like sourcing Top Talent for critical/difficult/visible (CDV) positions to reduce Cost of Vacancy and improve patient safety & satisfaction.

Page 30: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

104,742

27,613

5,3494, 761

NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS

CANDIDATES ROUTEDFOR CONSIDERATION

OFFERS

HIRES

89% (93%)

22 (26) to 1

5.8 (6.4) to 1

Wait Time!

Unqualified Candidates!

STAFFING PROCESS EFFICIENCY OVERALL BM—2016 (2015)

WASTE!

© 1997 – 2016, Lean Human Capital, LLC

Page 31: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

YEAR OVER YEAR CHANGES!

Overall OVERALL - 2015 Study OVERALL - 2016 Study

Mean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25

Applicant to Positions Filled Ratio 30 39 26 22 25 31 22 16

Applicants Routed to Positions Filled Ratio 7.2 10.5 6.4 3.7 5.8 7.0 5.8 4.2

% of Positions Filled from Extended Offers 91% 88% 93% 95% 89% 88% 89% 93%

Direct Care RNs OVERALL - 2015 Study OVERALL - 2016 Study

Mean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25

Applicant to Positions Filled Ratio 19 24 15 11 15 17 11 9

Applicants Routed to Positions Filled Ratio 4.6 5.5 3.6 2.5 4.5 5.2 4.0 3.0

% of Positions Filled from Extended Offers 91% 88% 93% 96% 87% 83% 88% 91%

Interesting Observations: High demand for talent and lower unemployment rates are reducing overall applicant volume. For difficult to fill positions, emphasis needs to be on increasing qualified, diverse applicants! As suspected, it is much more difficult to ‘close’ top talent in today’s market place (% of

Positions Filled from Extended Offers).

Page 32: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

EXPERIENCE VS NON-EXPERIENCE LEAN RECRUITMENT TRANSFORMATION JOURNEY MEMBERS!

Overall1+ Year Transformation Journey Less than 1 year Transformation

JourneyMean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25

Applicant to Positions Filled Ratio 29 35 30 19 23 28 21 14Applicants Routed to Positions Filled Ratio 5.3 6.9 5.4 3.6 6.1 6.9 5.9 4.2% of Positions Filled from Extended Offers 92% 89% 93% 94% 88% 88% 89% 90%

Direct Care RNs1+ Year Transformation Journey Less than 1 year Transformation

JourneyMean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25

Applicant to Positions Filled Ratio 13 17 11 10 16 18 12 9Applicants Routed to Positions Filled Ratio 3.9 5.2 3.6 1.8 4.9 5.2 4.0 3.5% of Positions Filled from Extended Offers 89% 88% 89% 92% 86% 83% 87% 91%

Interesting Observations: ETO’s drive more applicants, are more efficient and are better “Closers”! The must have Recruiter Academy Certified Recruiters

Page 33: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

REDUCING COST (WAIT/WASTE) PROCESS EFFICIENCYBENCHMARK - CASE STUDY

Efficiency Analysis (Applications/Routes/% of offers extended to positions filled)

Low 25% Top 25%

31/7.0/88% 16/4.2/93%# of applications received (dispositioned) 147,591 76,176 # of candidates routed to Hiring Mgr for consideration 33,327 19,996 # of offers extended to Candidates 5,410 5,119 Hires 4,761 4,761

Recruiter Time Savings Compared to Top 25%# Hours Saved by Recruiters dispositioning unqualified applicants (assuming review 75% of resumes @ 2 minutes per resume). 1785Hiring Manager Time Savings# Hours Saved by Hiring Managers Reviewing Resumes (assuming 3 minutes per resume) 667# Hours Saved by Hiring Managers Interviewing Candidates (assuming 50% are interviewed and each interview takes 1 hour) 6665Compared to Low 25%: Takes 9117 LESS hours to fill the same amount of positions (4761).

• Hiring Managers: 7332 LESS hours (invest in patient safety/satisfaction)

• Recruiters: Invest 1785 hours (full FTE) into sourcing!

Page 34: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

PRODUCTIVITY METRICS

Why Is It So Important?

Page 35: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

YEAR OVER YEAR CHANGES!

Quality - Hiring Manager Satisfaction Low 25%

(Not Good) Mean

(Healthy)Top 25%

(Not Good)

Staff Productivity (Positions filled / Staff FTE) 139 (145) 177 (183) 216 (230)

Openings per Recruiter 36 (42) 52 (50) 69 (74)

Quality - New Hire Satisfaction Low 25% Median Top 25%

Employee Referral %* 8% (10%) 13% (16%) 18% (20%)

NOTE: When staff productivity and openings per recruiter exceeds Top 25%, it negatively impacts speed, quality of service, quality of hire, cost and efficiency

Interesting Observations: We have re-thought what a healthy/optimal range is for Staff Productivity and Openings per recruiter. At 177 and

50 respectively, you can perform at “cream of the crap” levels with respect to % of positions filled in over 60 days and TTF.

If you invest in sourcing personnel, we believe healthy/optimal staff productivity and openings per recruiter/sourcer will be around 100-130 and 30-40 respectively. We will be monitoring leading organizations this year that have invested in sourcing resources and the impact they will have on TTF, Cost of Vacancy, etc.

Page 36: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

PRODUCTIVITY – STORY BEHIND THE #’S

1+ Year Transformation Journey Less than 1 year Transformation Journey

Mean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25

Staff Productivity 165 121 167 205 193 142 180 220

Openings Per Recruiter 44 49 43 36 69 77 59 40

Employee Referral % 19% 12% 16% 23% 12% 7% 11% 18%

Interesting Observations: ETO’s have invested in more resources (including sourcers) and have positively impacted Staff Productivity and

Openings Per Recruiter. We will need to see if they can start to reduce the % of positions filled (and TTF) in over 60 days.

ETO’s significantly perform better with respect to leveraging employees for referrals. Overall, these organizations have invested in structured Employee Referral Programs and some have invested in technology based PERPs.

Page 37: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

QUALITY METRICS

Quality Hires Drives HCAPHS!

Page 38: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

YEAR OVER YEAR CHANGES!Overall Positions – 2016 Benchmark Study OVERALL SMALL MEDIUM LARGE

Mean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25Avg 90 Day Separation/Turnover Rate - Overall 6.7% 8.4% 6.6% 4.9% 5.6% 7.1% 5.4% 4.4% 6.8% 9.1% 6.5% 4.8% 7.6% 8.7% 7.8% 6.7%Avg 90 Day Separation/Turnover Rate - FT/PT 6.2% 8.3% 5.8% 4.1% 4.8% 6.1% 4.7% 3.4% 6.2% 8.3% 6.0% 4.1% 7.6% 9.5% 8.3% 6.0%Avg 90 Day Separation/Turnover Rate - Contingent/Per Diem 9.0% 10.1% 7.4% 5.3% 8.6% 10.6% 6.9% 5.4% 8.9% 10.7% 8.0% 5.6% 9.4% 9.0% 7.6% 4.6%Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - Overall 18.0% 22.4% 17.2% 12.9% 16.3% 21.0% 15.8% 13.7% 17.4% 21.0% 16.1% 11.0% 20.8% 23.9% 20.6% 16.9%Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - FT/PT 16.5% 21.7% 15.6% 11.4% 14.2% 15.8% 14.8% 13.3% 15.8% 20.6% 15.8% 9.6% 19.9% 25.1% 21.1% 16.4%Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - Contingent/Per Diem 25.0% 31.6% 24.5% 15.3% 24.9% 28.0% 21.7% 15.8% 25.4% 32.0% 22.0% 16.7% 24.7% 33.4% 26.5% 13.8%Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - FT/PT VOLUNTARY 13.4% 17.5% 12.7% 9.3% 11.9% 12.7% 11.2% 9.5% 12.7% 15.5% 12.6% 8.4% 15.6% 20.1% 16.5% 11.6%Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - FT/PT INVOLUNTARY 3.8% 5.0% 4.1% 2.2% 3.5% 4.9% 4.4% 1.6% 3.5% 5.1% 3.7% 2.6% 4.3% 6.0% 4.4% 3.3%Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - Contingent & Per Diem VOLUNTARY 19.3% 23.7% 18.9% 13.3% 16.9% 22.0% 16.2% 12.5% 19.6% 24.1% 19.7% 15.7% 21.0% 24.0% 21.3% 13.8%Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - Contingent & Per Diem INVOLUNTARY 5.1% 5.2% 3.7% 2.3% 4.5% 6.1% 3.1% 2.1% 4.6% 4.9% 3.1% 2.7% 6.1% 5.2% 4.8% 2.8%Avg 90 Day Separation Turnover Rate - FT/PT VOLUNTARY 4.6% 5.7% 4.5% 3.2% 3.7% 4.3% 3.5% 2.4% 4.6% 5.3% 4.7% 3.2% 5.3% 6.5% 5.7% 3.8%Avg 90 Day SeparationTurnover Rate - FT/PT INVOLUNTARY 1.8% 2.4% 1.8% 1.2% 1.6% 2.1% 1.6% 0.8% 1.7% 2.0% 1.7% 1.2% 2.3% 3.2% 2.2% 1.8%Avg 90 Day Separation Turnover Rate - Contingent & Per Diem VOLUNTARY 6.7% 7.8% 6.0% 3.9% 5.3% 6.5% 4.8% 2.7% 7.2% 8.4% 6.6% 5.4% 7.5% 6.6% 5.7% 4.9%Avg 90 Day Separation Turnover Rate - Contingent & Per Diem INVOLUNTARY 1.9% 2.2% 1.7% 0.9% 2.4% 3.7% 1.8% 0.8% 1.6% 2.0% 1.6% 1.2% 1.8% 2.2% 1.7% 0.8%

Overall Positions - 2015 Benchmark Study OVERALL SMALL MEDIUM LARGEMean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25

Avg 90 Day Separation/Turnover Rate - Overall 7.5% 8.0% 7.2% 5.7% 7.2% 7.9% 7.1% 5.9% 8.4% 8.6% 7.2% 5.9% 6.9% 7.6% 7.1% 5.7%Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - Overall 18.4% 22.0% 18.4% 13.3% 17.0% 20.5% 17.3% 12.0% 20.8% 24.2% 18.0% 14.0% 17.5% 21.0% 18.1% 14.3%

Interesting Observations: While overall Turnover benchmarks went down YoY, further data analysis indicates:

This was affected by smaller organizations in markets with less competition and organization with great industry brand recognition Turnover for Large Organizations went up YoY.

The % of voluntary versus involuntary turnover suggests that overall TO issues have more to do with ‘on the job factors’ versus recruitment/hiring (IE – we made a bad hire and need to terminate them).

Analyzing TO by recruiter each quarter remains a best practice to help identify root cause issues and develop solutions to positively impact TO.

Page 39: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

YEAR OVER YEAR CHANGES!Direct Care RNs - 2016 Study OVERALL SMALL MEDIUM LARGE

Mean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25Avg 90 Day Separation/Turnover Rate 5.1% 6.3% 3.8% 2.8% 3.8% 4.1% 3.1% 2.7% 5.2% 6.2% 4.1% 2.7% 6.4% 7.8% 6.0% 3.5%Avg 90 Day Separation/Turnover Rate - FT/PT 4.5% 5.7% 4.1% 2.5% 3.5% 4.1% 2.6% 2.2% 4.7% 5.7% 4.4% 2.8% 5.3% 6.5% 5.3% 3.2%Avg 90 Day Separation/Turnover Rate - Contingent/Per Diem 5.4% 8.7% 4.4% 2.1% 4.8% 6.9% 4.4% 3.3% 4.4% 7.2% 1.4% 0.0% 7.5% 11.1% 9.2% 3.7%Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate 14.9% 18.3% 14.1% 9.1% 13.1% 16.8% 13.3% 10.5% 14.4% 17.2% 12.6% 8.3% 17.7% 21.8% 19.8% 13.0%Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - FT/PT 13.1% 16.6% 12.9% 8.0% 12.1% 14.9% 12.3% 9.3% 12.7% 16.3% 11.2% 7.6% 14.7% 18.0% 15.8% 9.0%Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - Contingent/Per Diem 25.4% 34.1% 18.8% 10.9% 16.9% 21.0% 18.6% 12.7% 26.7% 33.5% 20.8% 12.0% 32.8% 43.7% 39.8% 9.1%Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - FT/PT VOLUNTARY 11.2% 14.1% 10.5% 6.5% 9.7% 11.6% 10.1% 6.8% 11.0% 13.7% 9.2% 5.9% 12.7% 15.5% 13.3% 7.5%Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - FT/PT INVOLUNTARY 2.2% 3.1% 2.2% 1.4% 2.4% 3.2% 2.3% 1.2% 2.2% 3.1% 2.3% 1.7% 2.0% 2.7% 1.9% 1.3%Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - Contingent & Per Diem VOLUNTARY 19.6% 24.1% 18.5% 8.3% 14.8% 20.9% 18.5% 8.7% 16.7% 24.5% 16.0% 7.9% 28.0% 40.4% 20.6% 8.5%Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - Contingent & Per Diem INVOLUNTARY 3.5% 5.0% 1.5% 0.0% 1.6% 2.2% 0.0% 0.0% 3.9% 6.8% 4.2% 0.2% 4.8% 4.2% 3.2% 1.1%Avg 90 Day Separation Turnover Rate - FT/PT VOLUNTARY 3.6% 4.4% 2.9% 2.0% 2.7% 2.9% 2.1% 1.7% 3.8% 4.1% 2.9% 2.3% 4.2% 4.9% 4.0% 2.5%Avg 90 Day SeparationTurnover Rate - FT/PT INVOLUNTARY 1.0% 1.5% 1.0% 0.4% 0.6% 0.8% 0.5% 0.0% 1.2% 1.5% 1.3% 1.0% 1.1% 1.6% 1.0% 0.5%Avg 90 Day Separation Turnover Rate - Contingent & Per Diem VOLUNTARY 4.1% 6.9% 3.9% 1.4% 3.8% 5.3% 3.9% 2.3% 2.8% 5.8% 0.0% 0.0% 6.0% 8.6% 6.9% 3.7%Avg 90 Day Separation Turnover Rate - Contingent & Per Diem INVOLUNTARY 1.0% 2.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 0.4% 0.0% 0.0% 1.5% 2.2% 1.5% 0.0%

Direct Care RNs - 2015 Benchmark Study OVERALL SMALL MEDIUM LARGEMean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25

Avg 90 Day Separation/Turnover Rate - All Direct Care RNs 5.4% 6.6% 4.7% 3.1% 4.6% 5.8% 5.4% 4.5% 6.5% 7.0% 4.4% 3.1% 4.3% 5.7% 4.2% 3.1%Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - All Direct Care RNs 14.4% 17.0% 13.5% 9.1% 11.4% 14.7% 12.2% 7.6% 17.7% 21.3% 13.9% 13.4% 12.5% 15.0% 13.5% 9.2%

Interesting Observations: Very similar to All Positions as outlined in previous slide.

Page 40: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

EXPERIENCE VS NON-EXPERIENCE LEAN RECRUITMENT TRANSFORMATION JOURNEY MEMBERS!

All Positions 1+ Year Transformation Journey Less than 1 year Transformation JourneyMean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25

Avg 90 Day Separation/Turnover Rate - Overall 7.1% 8.3% 6.8% 6.0% 6.5% 8.4% 6.1% 4.5%

Avg 90 Day Separation/Turnover Rate - FT/PT 7.3% 8.3% 7.2% 6.0% 5.7% 8.5% 5.1% 3.3%

Avg 90 Day Separation/Turnover Rate - Contingent/Per Diem 6.9% 8.6% 7.6% 6.0% 10.0% 11.1% 7.4% 5.1%

Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - Overall 20.8% 23.5% 21.5% 18.6% 16.9% 20.6% 15.8% 11.6%

Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - FT/PT 20.0% 23.4% 20.3% 17.7% 15.1% 19.9% 14.7% 9.7%

Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - Contingent/Per Diem 23.2% 29.4% 26.0% 15.9% 25.9% 33.8% 21.7% 15.5%

Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - FT/PT VOLUNTARY 15.8% 19.6% 16.5% 13.0% 12.3% 15.6% 11.4% 9.1%

Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - FT/PT INVOLUNTARY 4.2% 5.1% 4.3% 3.5% 3.6% 5.0% 3.8% 1.6%

Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - Contingent & Per Diem VOLUNTARY 17.8% 23.4% 20.8% 11.4% 20.1% 23.5% 17.6% 13.4%

Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - Contingent & Per Diem INVOLUNTARY 5.3% 5.0% 4.8% 3.4% 4.9% 5.7% 2.8% 2.0%

Avg 90 Day Separation Turnover Rate - FT/PT VOLUNTARY 5.1% 5.7% 5.3% 4.1% 4.3% 5.5% 3.9% 2.8%

Avg 90 Day SeparationTurnover Rate - FT/PT INVOLUNTARY 2.2% 2.9% 2.0% 1.7% 1.7% 2.2% 1.7% 0.9%

Avg 90 Day Separation Turnover Rate - Contingent & Per Diem VOLUNTARY 5.2% 6.5% 5.8% 4.1% 7.6% 8.9% 6.1% 4.2%

Avg 90 Day Separation Turnover Rate - Contingent & Per Diem INVOLUNTARY 1.8% 2.2% 1.6% 1.0% 2.0% 2.2% 1.8% 0.9%

Interesting Observations: ETO’s do NOT perform better with respect to TO. Some factors to consider related to this data:

o Many of the ETO’s are larger health systems in highly competitive markets.o 90-day and 1st year TO are laggard metrics. Investments in improvements will take 6 months to 1 year ++ to see results.

We plan to analyze this data further in the coming month. We will provide further insights in future sessions.

Page 41: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

EXPERIENCE VS NON-EXPERIENCE LEAN RECRUITMENT TRANSFORMATION JOURNEY MEMBERS!

Direct Care RN's 1+ Year Transformation Journey Less than 1 year Transformation JourneyMean Low 25 Med Top 25 Mean Low 25 Med Top 25

Avg 90 Day Separation/Turnover Rate 5.9% 6.2% 5.2% 3.7% 4.8% 6.2% 3.2% 2.5%

Avg 90 Day Separation/Turnover Rate - FT/PT 4.8% 5.5% 4.8% 3.1% 4.3% 5.6% 3.0% 2.1%

Avg 90 Day Separation/Turnover Rate - Contingent/Per Diem 6.2% 9.0% 6.6% 3.4% 5.0% 8.1% 3.9% 0.3%

Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate 17.3% 21.1% 16.7% 14.8% 13.9% 17.6% 12.3% 8.2%

Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - FT/PT 14.2% 16.6% 14.0% 10.4% 12.6% 16.4% 12.1% 7.7%

Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - Contingent/Per Diem 32.5% 41.6% 31.0% 16.7% 22.3% 25.0% 18.5% 9.0%

Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - FT/PT VOLUNTARY 12.1% 15.0% 12.4% 8.0% 10.7% 13.6% 10.1% 6.1%

Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - FT/PT INVOLUNTARY 2.1% 2.5% 2.1% 1.5% 2.3% 3.2% 2.3% 1.4%

Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - Contingent & Per Diem VOLUNTARY 28.1% 39.1% 25.8% 10.1% 15.1% 20.8% 18.2% 8.1%

Avg First Year of Service Turnover Rate - Contingent & Per Diem INVOLUNTARY 4.4% 8.1% 3.8% 1.2% 3.0% 3.7% 0.4% 0.0%

Avg 90 Day Separation Turnover Rate - FT/PT VOLUNTARY 3.8% 4.5% 3.2% 2.3% 3.5% 4.1% 2.6% 2.0%

Avg 90 Day SeparationTurnover Rate - FT/PT INVOLUNTARY 1.1% 1.5% 1.2% 0.7% 0.9% 1.4% 0.7% 0.4%

Avg 90 Day Separation Turnover Rate - Contingent & Per Diem VOLUNTARY 4.9% 8.3% 4.9% 1.8% 3.7% 6.1% 3.7% 0.8%

Avg 90 Day Separation Turnover Rate - Contingent & Per Diem INVOLUNTARY 1.3% 1.7% 0.2% 0.0% 0.9% 1.8% 0.0% 0.0%

Interesting Observations: Very similar to All Positions as outlined in previous slide.

Page 42: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDED QUALITY OF HIRE METRICS

Are turnover rates a good measure of Quality of Hire?

2.0 Metrics - Quality of Hire

Hiring Manager VOC - Perception of Quality of Hire

6 month/1 year average performance appraisal scores

Turnover % of HiPo's – “Regrettable TO” (90, 180, 365 days)

% of HiPo's hired (6 month/1 year survey of managers, asking # of hires that are High Potential)

Diversity Hire % - key job families and/or grade level(s)

Page 43: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

QUALITY OF SERVICE

Are our Customers Raving Fans?

Page 44: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

ANALYZING THE APPLICANT EXPERIENCE (VOICE OF THE CUSTOMER)

Page 45: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

VOICE OF THE CUSTOMER

•HMARTsm

•New Hire Experience•Non-Hired Applicant Experience

Dr. Jeffery Sanchez-Burks, Associate Professor from the University of Michigan Ross School of Business, and Partner at LHC, developed this statistically validated assessment survey methodology.

Page 46: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

VOICE OF CUSTOMER AGGREGATE DATA INFORMATION

HMART:o Over 350,000 responses

o 16,850+ hiring managers responded

o 15,800+ recruiter evaluations

New Hire Experience:o Over 563,000 responses

o 13,500+ surveys completed

Non Hired Applicant Experience:o Over 1 million responses

o 33,000+ Surveys completed

Page 47: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

VOICE OF THE CUSTOMER (7PT SCALE)Hiring Manager Assessment of Recruitment Team (HMART) Low 25% Median Top 25%

Overall 5.5 5.8 6.0Understanding/Expertise 5.4 5.8 5.9

Communication 5.2 5.6 5.8Care 5.7 6.0 6.2

Satisfaction 5.5 5.8 6.0Quality of Hire (Rated by Hiring Manager) 5.7 5.9 6.1

The New Hire Candidate Experience Low 25% Median Top 25%Overall 5.9 6.1 6.2

Experience with the Career Website Application Process 5.7 5.8 6.0

Communication Experience with the HR/Recruitment Representative 5.9 6.1 6.1Experience with Hiring Managers 6.2 6.3 6.3

Service and Support Received During the Hiring Process 6.0 6.1 6.2Onboarding Experience 5.9 6.0 6.1

The Non-Hired Applicant Experience Low 25% Median Top 25%Overall 4.0 4.1 4.3

Experience with the Career Website Application Process 4.6 4.8 5.0

Communication Experience with the HR/Recruitment Representative 3.6 3.8 4.0Experience with Hiring Managers 3.8 4.0 4.2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

CompletelyDisagree

Strongly Disagree

SomewhatDisagree

Neither Agree nor Disagree

SomewhatAgree Strongly Agree Completely

Agree

Page 48: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

VOICE OF THE CUSTOMER – RAVING FAN INDEXHiring Manager Assessment of Recruitment Team (HMART) Low 25% Median Top 25%

Overall 62.3% 70.2% 76.5%Understanding/Expertise 58.8% 69.7% 73.8%

Communication 55.3% 64.1% 68.8%Care 68.3% 76.5% 83.4%

Satisfaction 63.6% 72.2% 76.6%Quality of Hire (Rated by Hiring Manager) 68.2% 75.1% 78.0%

The New Hire Candidate Experience Low 25% Median Top 25%Overall 76.1% 79.9% 82.3%

Experience with the Career Website Application Process 66.9% 72.9% 75.6%

Communication Experience with the HR/Recruitment Representative75.9% 79.4% 82.1%

Experience with Hiring Managers 83.0% 85.1% 88.0%Service and Support Received During the Hiring Process 78.3% 81.3% 83.2%

Onboarding Experience 75.4% 78.1% 81.8%The Non-Hired Applicant Experience Low 25% Median Top 25%

Overall 28.0% 32.5% 35.4%Experience with the Career Website Application Process 38.5% 43.1% 50.0%

Communication Experience with the HR/Recruitment Representative22.9% 26.9% 30.9%

Experience with Hiring Managers 25.6% 30.3% 34.8%

Page 49: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

VOICE OF THE CUSTOMER – DISSATISFIED CUSTOMERS

Hiring Manager Assessment of Recruitment Team (HMART) Low 25% Median Top 25%Overall 12.5% 8.5% 6.1%

Understanding/Expertise 14.8% 9.4% 5.9%Communication 22.0% 14.9% 9.5%

Care 6.1% 4.3% 2.8%Satisfaction 16.2% 11.3% 7.0%

Quality of Hire (Rated by Hiring Manager) 5.7% 4.1% 2.5%The New Hire Candidate Experience Low 25% Median Top 25%

Overall 6.5% 5.4% 4.6%Experience with the Career Website Application Process 8.7% 7.2% 5.6%

Communication Experience with the HR/Recruitment Representative7.1% 5.4% 4.1%

Experience with Hiring Managers 4.0% 3.1% 2.2%Service and Support Received During the Hiring Process 8.0% 6.1% 5.1%

Onboarding Experience 7.4% 5.5% 4.4%The Non-Hired Applicant Experience Low 25% Median Top 25%

Overall 41.8% 37.3% 33.5%Experience with the Career Website Application Process 28.4% 24.2% 21.4%

Communication Experience with the HR/Recruitment Representative46.8% 44.9% 39.1%

Experience with Hiring Managers 44.6% 38.7% 34.9%

Page 50: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

ELITE HONOR ROLL!

Page 51: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

FOUNDATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF ELITE RECRUITMENT ORGANIZATIONS

- Five Key Foundational Characteristics for Success:

1. Technology, Tools & Scalable, Lean Process(s).2. Adequate # of Resources (and optimized

organizational structure) to meet Hiring Demand. 3. Competency/Skills of the Recruitment Staff

and Leaders.4. Leadership support and Hiring Manager

commitment to a lean, customer-centric hiring process.

5. Commitment to Management by Fact/Continuous Improvement Culture.

- While most organizations invest 75% of their time, money and resources on technology, tools and scalable processes, our research indicates the primary drivers of success are related to elements #2, #3, #4 and #5 noted above.

Page 52: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

ELITE HONOR ROLL – SELECTION CRITERIA

Criteria for Selection:

• Overall performance in our 25 Key Recruitment Metrics Performance Index (a combination of key metrics from five performance outcome areas: Responsiveness, Process Efficiency, Productivity, Cost, and Quality of Hire).

• Overall performance in our Validated Voice-of-the-Customer Assessments (Hiring Manager, New Hire and Non-Hired Applicant.

• Used their Recruitment Team’s Scorecard to manage their business and build a culture using data & fact.

• Demonstrated a strong commitment to continuous improvement and lifelong learning.

• Implemented innovative solutions to improve key metrics and drive cost savings for their organizations. Mission: To publicly recognize

those recruitment organizations performing at an ‘Elite’ Level

Page 53: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

TRANSFORMATION JOURNEY COMMITMENT TO CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT!

“A continuous improvement process never stops. It wasn’t implemented just once. It’s constant

improvement, constant innovation and constant elimination of extra steps. The most important principle is that this is not a four-

month project. You will see benefits, but you must do it continually.”

Source: http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu

Page 54: HEALTHCARE RECRUITMENT METRICS BENCHMARK STUDY … · • A Lean, Sig Sigma certified Green Belt, Recruitment professional. • Began working with Lean methodology in 1994, streamlining

Questions?Presenter Contact Information for Additional Questions:

REMEMBER! Rate each session you attend in the

Mobile App

★ ★ ★ ★ ★1-5 Stars,

5 being the best.

THANK YOU!

Deb VargovickSenior Consultant – Lean Human Capital

HealthcareSource(248)918-8799

[email protected]