Why slow interview processes cost you great people!

Guest post from Paul Withers

Hiring people is hard.

Not because of a lack of candidates.

Because good candidates do not want to be messed about.

Long interview processes increase drop-out, lead to offer rejections, and waste time.

They also send a message, often unintentionally, about how decisions are made inside your business.

A well-structured interview process does more than move quickly.

It improves decision quality and protects your employer’s reputation.

Why interview speed is a leadership issue

Slow hiring is rarely about workload.

It is usually about unclear ownership and too many voices.

For HR teams, this creates risk:

• Strong candidates disengage
• Stakeholders lose momentum
• Criteria shift mid-process
• Decisions get delayed or avoided

For business leaders, the cost is simple:

• Lost talent
• Extended vacancies
• Repeated interview time

Speed and quality are not opposites.

Structure is what connects them.

A practical example: hiring a Chief People Officer

At The HR Guys, I recently supported a tech business hiring a Chief People Officer.

Before speaking to candidates, we agreed on a three-stage process and locked diaries in advance.

Each stage had a clear purpose and decision outcome.

First stage: structured screening interviews

I ran initial interviews via Teams.

Purpose:

• Test motivation, scope, and cultural alignment
• Remove travel friction
• Create a consistent assessment baseline

Outcome:

• Clear, written feedback shared with the CEO after each interview
• Fast decisions on who progressed and why

This avoided vague shortlists and reduced second-guessing later.

Second stage: early leadership alignment

Shortlisted candidates met the CEO online.

Purpose:

• Test strategic fit early
• Avoid late-stage surprises
• Give candidates direct access to the real decision-maker

Outcome:

• Faster shortlisting
• Stronger candidate commitment
• Fewer process drop-outs

Candidates knew where they stood early.

So did the business.

Final stage: one visit, full picture

The final two candidates attended a single on-site visit.

Purpose:

• Replace multiple final meetings with one focused session
• Assess leadership, influence, and credibility
• Allow mutual due diligence

Outcome:

• Presentations to the executive team
• Interviews with founders
• Time spent with the HR function

Everything happened in one day.

No repeat visits.

No unnecessary delays.

What candidates noticed

Feedback was positive across the board, including from unsuccessful candidates.

They valued:

• Clarity on stages and timelines
• Regular, honest feedback
• Early exposure to senior leadership

Several commented that the process reflected a decisive and well-run organisation.

That feedback matters.

Candidates talk.

They share experiences with peers.

Your interview process shapes your reputation long after the hire is made.

Practical ways to tighten your interview process

What worked here applies to many roles:

• Agree interview stages before you advertise
• Lock decision-maker availability early
• Use video interviews to build momentum
• Combine final assessments into one visit
• Be clear on what each stage must decide

If a stage does not change a decision, question why it exists.

A challenge for HR and business leaders

Where does your hiring process slow down?

Which step exists out of habit rather than need?

And what would change if you removed just one unnecessary stage?