THE #1 REASON TO FILL OPEN POSITIONS IN A TIMELY MANNER

​In the world of business and employment, value is king. Companies hire employees because those employees provide value, predominately through the work that they do for the organization.
For many companies, that value takes the form of production. If employees are producing, that creates value. (Ultimately, it creates cash flow and profit.) If employees are not producing, then they’re not creating value. (And by extension, that hurts the company’s cash flow and margin of profit.)
When do you know for sure when an employee is not producing and creating value for your organization?
When that employee doesn’t even exist. In other words, when you have an open position. In that situation, there isn’t anybody who can produce.
No employee = no production = no value = lower profitability
That’s not the prettiest equation, to be sure. However, it represents the #1 reason why companies should strive to fill their open positions in a timely manner.
This pertains to all positions, as well, not just direct hire ones. It doesn’t matter if an organization has a direct hire need, a temp need, or a temp-to-direct need. The fact that it has a hiring need indicates that it also has a need for production, value, and profit.
It is no less a priority for an organization to fill a temp position than it is to fill a direct hire one. The need still exists. And if the need still exists and it goes unmet, then there are consequences. As pointed out above, those consequences include no production, no value, and lower profitability.
So it goes to follow that the longer a position remains open, the longer there is no production, value, or increased profitability. (As you can see, the pattern is unmistakable.)
There is a common misconception about an open position. According to that misconception, an organization is actually saving money while the position is open. That’s because the company does not have to pay another worker’s salary and additional costs incurred by employing them. Management simply instructs other employees to take over the tasks and duties associated with the open position.
This is a misconception because, quite frankly, it’s false. Below are just two reasons why this is the case:
#1—No investment means no return on that investment
Ideally, when you have a worker in a position, the cost of employing the person is outweighed by the value they bring to the company. That’s why you hire them in the first place, because you expect to receive a return on your investment. If the position remains open, it’s impossible to receive that return because you’re not making the investment in the first place.
Sure, you’re saving the money you would have spent on the investment. But you’re also losing the money you would have made because of the investment. This might give you the illusion of winning when you’re actually losing.
#2—Lost productivity from other employees
When other employees are forced to “pick up the slack” for an open position, their value (and their productivity) diminish. They have less time, energy, and resources to complete the tasks associated with their own job. Not only that, but they also are not able to do the tasks associated with the open position as well as somebody who is completely devoted to it on a daily basis.
Filling open positions in a timely manner is not an option. It’s an employment imperative.