People love to compare everything about San Francisco and New York: the food, the weather, the nightlife, even the public transportation. Today, Lever’s joining the chorus by comparing hiring habits.
Our latest benchmarks report for startups and SMBs studied how hiring varies by factors like a candidate’s origin and role. But that’s not all we looked into. With talent flocking to San Francisco and New York every year, we wanted to know how hiring in the two cities compared.
What did we find? Not a showdown at all, but a rare streak of similarity. The striking differences in hiring, it turns out, are between them and everywhere else.
Is SMB and startup hiring harder in San Francisco and New York than the rest of the country?
With all of this data, we can still only speculate at the answer.
Because conversion rates from stage to stage are lower in San Francisco and New York than elsewhere, it could indicate a lack of qualified candidates. On the other hand, it could indicate a higher-than-average number of qualified candidates, which allows companies in the two metro areas to be more selective in their selection processes.
What is clear, is that it takes more candidates in the San Francisco and New York areas across every stage, and therefore more work, to make a hire than it does on average everywhere else. If you’re a recruiter in San Francisco or New York, you’re very likely sinking more time and energy into every hire you make than your peers in other cities.
Download the full recruiting benchmarks report here.