Assuming the compensation of a position roughly equals that position’s importance to the organization, we can say that the higher the salary of the position, the superiority of the Quality-of-Hire metric to the Time-To-Fill and Cost-Of-Hire metrics is most profound. Still, recruiting departments give their internal clients — hiring managers — service levels or expectations of when a given position can be filled. The Time-To-Fill service level depends on several variables including:

*unemployment rate (the lower this is, the longer the ttf)
*your company’s offering in terms of salary range, benefits, location, employer brand, “referral culture” (the better these are, the shorter the ttf)
*luck — you receive great resumes from a job board posting or from a recruiter the next day
*supply/demand balance of the skillset in question
*recruiting department’s skill and existing “pipeline” of candidates from previous searches in this skill set
*length of time to complete the interview process and make an offer
*company’s ability to provide relocation assistance and to hire candidates needing visa sponsorship

Applicant Tracking Systems generally track the historic “time-to-fill” metrics so these are probably adequate proxies balanced with the factors mentioned above.