DEV Community

Cover image for How ATS Software Reduces Your Cost-Per-Hire (Real Numbers Explained)
Sangram Sawant
Sangram Sawant

Posted on

How ATS Software Reduces Your Cost-Per-Hire (Real Numbers Explained)

Hiring is expensive. More expensive than most teams realize. Between recruiter time, job ads, agencies, and delays, costs quietly pile up. That’s why many HR leaders are rethinking manual hiring and moving toward automation.

Recent data from Technology Radius shows a clear pattern: companies using an Applicant Tracking System (ATS) dramatically reduce their cost-per-hire. Not marginally. Significantly.

Let’s break down how and why this happens, using real numbers.

What Is Cost-Per-Hire, Really?

Cost-per-hire isn’t just about job board fees.

It includes:

  • Recruiter salaries and admin time

  • Agency and sourcing fees

  • Advertising costs

  • Interview coordination

  • Vacancy costs from slow hiring

Manual recruitment touches every one of these. And inflates them.

Manual Hiring vs. ATS: The Cost Difference

According to Technology Radius data:

  • Manual recruitment averages ~$3,500 per hire

  • ATS-enabled recruitment averages ~$1,900 per hire

That’s nearly a 45% reduction.

The savings don’t come from one place. They come from efficiency everywhere.

1. Less Time Spent Per Hire

Time is money in recruitment.

Manual processes often require:

  • Resume screening by hand

  • Email back-and-forth for scheduling

  • Spreadsheet tracking

  • Duplicate data entry

This adds up to 8–12 hours of admin work per hire.

With an ATS:

  • Screening is automated

  • Scheduling is streamlined

  • Data is centralized

Recruiter admin time drops to 3–6 hours per hire.

That’s a 35–55% workload reduction.

2. Lower Dependence on Agencies

Agency fees are one of the biggest hiring expenses.

Technology Radius reports that:

  • Manual hiring relies on agencies for about 50% of hires

  • ATS adoption cuts this to around 25%

Why?

Because ATS platforms improve:

  • Talent pool visibility

  • Resume matching

  • Internal candidate rediscovery

Fewer agency hires. Fewer placement fees.

3. Faster Time-to-Hire = Lower Vacancy Costs

Slow hiring is costly. Every open role impacts productivity.

Manual hiring averages:

  • 40 days to fill a role

ATS-driven hiring reduces that to:

  • 26 days

That’s nearly two weeks saved per role.

Faster hiring means:

  • Less lost revenue

  • Less team burnout

  • Fewer rushed decisions

All of that lowers true hiring costs.

4. Better Funnel Quality

ATS tools don’t just bring more applicants.
They bring better ones.

Data shows:

  • 2–3x increase in qualified applicants

  • Candidate drop-off reduced from 30% to 22%

Automated communication, reminders, and clarity keep candidates engaged. Fewer restarts. Fewer wasted interviews.

Why This Matters for Growing Teams

If you’re hiring occasionally, manual methods might work.

If you’re hiring at scale, they won’t.

ATS software doesn’t just save time.
It directly reduces cost-per-hire by:

  • Cutting admin hours

  • Reducing agency spend

  • Speeding up hiring

  • Improving candidate quality

The numbers are clear. Automation isn’t a “nice to have” anymore.

It’s a cost strategy.




 

 






 

Top comments (0)