eipaw has a functional recruitment health profile.
The strongest opportunity is to reduce vacancy delays and focus the next review on reduce decision latency.
AI-assisted analysis surfaces the signals. Rec-Revolution judgement helps decide what matters and how to turn it into action.
50
/ 100
Functional
Estimated annual leakage
£1,341,900
Recruitment maturity
Developing
Benchmark comparison
Similar firms hire 31% faster
Commercial impact
£1,341,900
Estimated leakage led by vacancy delays.
Primary focus
Reduce Decision Latency
Shorter hiring cycles and lower candidate drop-off within the next review period.
Next action
Book review session
Use these findings to agree the first 90-day recruitment improvement plan.
Executive summary
What this means
eipaw has a functional recruitment health score of 50/100.
Estimated annual recruitment leakage is £1,341,900, led by vacancy delays.
The strongest consulting angle is high opportunity around reduce decision latency.
Score breakdown
Recruitment engine health
Your three biggest opportunities
What to do next
These recommendations are data-informed and expert-guided, designed to support better recruitment decisions rather than replace human judgement.
Reduce Decision Latency
Problem
Finance vacancies are taking around 49 days to fill.
Suggested action
Set clear stage ownership, introduce weekly hiring standups, and cap feedback windows at 48 hours.
Expected outcome
Shorter hiring cycles and lower candidate drop-off within the next review period.
Reduce Agency Dependence
Problem
Agency usage is running at approximately 50% across current hiring demand.
Suggested action
Segment agency use by role difficulty, build direct sourcing lists, and reserve agencies for true specialist searches.
Expected outcome
Lower external spend without reducing hiring coverage.
Introduce a Manager Hiring Framework
Problem
Manager feedback is averaging roughly 8 days.
Suggested action
Give managers a simple hiring SLA, role briefing template, and feedback scorecard.
Expected outcome
Clearer accountability and faster candidate progression.
Cost leakage
Where value may be leaking
Top risks
What could slow progress
Slow Hiring
highHiring cycles are longer than comparable organisations.
Likely increasing vacancy cost, candidate drop-off, and agency reliance.
Agency Overdependence
highAgency usage appears structurally high rather than exceptional.
Recruitment cost may be masking problems in direct attraction, process speed, or manager ownership.
Manager Bottlenecks
highHiring manager behaviour is slowing recruitment performance.
Delayed feedback weakens candidate trust and forces the process to restart more often.
Recommended next step
Book a recruitment review session
Use this intelligence to agree the highest-value recruitment improvement priorities and turn the findings into a practical action plan.