The TA metrics that actually matter in 2026

For years, Talent Acquisition has been driven by metrics that look clean on dashboards - time to fill, cost per hire, application volume. But as Melissa Thompson, Global Head of Talent Acquisition at Ford, shared in our latest LinkedIn Live session, these numbers rarely reflect real business impact.

With insight from Melissa, Dan Caines (Head of Talent Acquisition at Babcock International Group) and Sam Berthoud (VP of Talent Solutions at hackajob), this article explores how TA leaders can shift from vanity metrics to value metrics and position their teams as true business partners.

Moving past vanity metrics and toward meaningful measurement

Traditional TA metrics are often lagging indicators. They describe what happened, but not why. Melissa Thompson highlighted a smarter approach: Quality of Slate.

Quality of Slate blends:

• Time to source

• Conversion from hiring manager review to interview

• Hiring manager feedback on whether they received a quality slate

Unlike Quality of Hire - which depends on retention and performance outcomes outside TA’s control - Quality of Slate measures what TA teams directly influence. It gives recruiters clearer ownership, improves alignment with hiring managers and creates a more diagnostic picture of process performance.

Ford now reports on this metric down to recruiter and requisition level, making it a foundational input for continuous improvement in 2026.

Fix the foundations before you innovate

While many companies feel pressure to adopt AI or overhaul their hiring tech stack, Dan Caines emphasised something far more important: foundations.

Across Babcock’s 28,000-person organisation, data lived in disconnected systems and different teams were tracking different versions of the truth. Before innovation could happen, Dan pushed to stabilise SuccessFactors, rebuild core reporting and align TA language with business language.

This mindset mirrors what we often see with organisations adopting new hiring technology. Tools only create value when the underlying data is consistent, connected and aligned with business priorities.

Speak the language of the business

One of the biggest gaps between TA teams and leadership comes down to language. TA reports process metrics. The business cares about outcomes.

Dan shared how reframing hiring performance in commercial terms changed the conversation entirely:

"I calculated the revenue we were leaking because of slow hiring - and suddenly finance was in the room."

This shift positioned TA as a revenue enabler rather than a cost centre. When TA leaders show how hiring speed, candidate relevance or improved conversion impacts financial performance, they earn influence and investment.

Curiosity is the real competitive edge

Data without curiosity doesn’t drive change. Melissa described how Ford uses "look-back sessions" with leaders across HR and the business. These sessions review internal vs external hiring mix, offer acceptance rates, grade-level hiring patterns and more.

The goal is not to report numbers, but to provoke questions:

• Is this the hiring mix you expected?

• Are we hiring too many individual contributors and not enough leaders?

• What does this quarter tell us about workforce needs next quarter?

We see this same mindset across high-performing TA teams: they use data not just to report, but to refine. When teams continuously tighten their inputs and assumptions, alignment with hiring managers becomes faster and more consistent.

Predictive planning and proactive pipelines

Both Ford and Babcock are shifting from reactive hiring to predictive planning.

Melissa asked her sourcing leader to model likely hiring demand for the next quarter using two years of historical data. When challenged on "what if we’re wrong," she reframed it:

"What if we’re right? If we are, we’re ahead of the curve. If we’re wrong, we’ve still built warm talent pools."

Meanwhile, Dan built a simple but powerful demand model that helped business units understand when to hire, when to shift capacity and when to explore international talent. This transformed partnership between TA, finance and workforce planning.

The result: faster time-to-start, higher productivity and reduced operational risk.

The metrics that will define TA success in 2026

Looking ahead, TA teams need a metric stack that aligns with business impact. Expect to see:

• Employment branding metrics that track relevance, not just reach

• Offer decline rate including verbal declines for accuracy

• Cost of cancelled requisitions to highlight wasted time and effort

• Hiring manager feedback completion as a relationship health signal

• Revenue per hire as a clear bridge between TA and business performance

These metrics help TA leaders prove value in ways the C-suite understands.

Build the frame before you paint the house

As Melissa said:

"Don’t worry about painting the house if you don’t have the frame up."

And as Dan put it more bluntly:

"Otherwise you’re just putting lipstick on a pig."

Whether you are rolling out automation, experimenting with AI or simply cleaning your data, the same principle applies: fix the foundations first. Get clarity on your processes, your ownership lines, your data model and your business outcomes.

Final takeaway: Time to impact beats time to fill

The future of TA is not about more data. It’s about better context.

Teams that align their metrics to business impact, automate the noise and stay curious about what the data is telling them will win. When teams build strong foundations, they’re better positioned to use modern tools, automation and AI intentionally. Whether through better calibration, cleaner workflows or sharper insights, the goal is always the same: enable recruiters to focus on the work that drives real outcomes.

Because in 2026, success won’t be defined by time to fill. It will be defined by time to impact.

If you want to see the full conversation, you can watch the complete session below. It’s packed with practical insights, real examples and the kind of clarity TA leaders can put to work immediately.

FAQ

What is the difference between vanity metrics and value metrics in TA?
Vanity metrics describe activity (like applications received or time to fill). Value metrics connect directly to business outcomes, such as revenue impact, quality of slate and time to productivity.

Why is Quality of Slate more useful than Quality of Hire?
Quality of Hire depends on post-hire factors outside TA’s control. Quality of Slate measures what recruiters directly influence and provides a clearer diagnostic for improving hiring processes.

What foundation should TA teams fix before adopting AI or automation?
Data consistency, clear process ownership, aligned systems and a shared understanding of business goals. Without these, technology only amplifies existing problems.

How can TA speak the business’s language more effectively?
Translate hiring outcomes into impact: revenue gained or protected, risk reduced, productivity accelerated. This reframes TA as a strategic partner rather than a cost center.

What metrics should TA leaders prioritise for 2026?
Relevance-based employer brand metrics, offer decline rates including verbal declines, cancelled requisition cost, hiring manager feedback completion and revenue per hire.