Reducing time to hire in critical food manufacturing roles

Food manufacturers are under growing pressure to fill management vacancies quickly.

Vacancy rates in food and drink manufacturing reached 3.9% in 2025, compared to 2.1% across manufacturing and 2.4% across the UK workforce. At the same time, skills shortages are becoming more severe, with 75% of food manufacturers now reporting deficits in key roles.

Yet despite the urgency, contingent recruitment (or no-win, no-fee) models still focus on sending candidates across quickly rather than properly assessing whether they are right for the role. Interviews begin before candidates have been fully vetted, and businesses spend weeks interviewing people who were never likely to succeed.

In this blog, we’ll explore how a more structured approach to recruitment helps manufacturing leaders avoid this problem. By assessing leadership style and cultural fit earlier in the process, food manufacturers can spend less time interviewing unsuitable candidates and more time focusing on the people who are most likely to perform well in the role.

Key summary

• Mid-level hires are more likely to succeed when employers assess leadership style and cultural fit rather than just technical experience
• Visiting manufacturing sites and conducting behavioural assessments helps to identify stronger long-term hires before interviews begin
• Corvin Fox uses a five-week recruitment process that narrows shortlists earlier to help manufacturers avoid repeat interviews, failed searches and unsuccessful hires

What we will cover

• Why getting mid-level hires right saves time later
• The five-week approach to better hiring
• Prioritising cultural fit
• Using psychometric testing to make better hiring choices
• Why making the right hire early matters more under the Employment Rights Act

Why getting mid-level hires right saves time later

Mid-level managers often have the biggest influence on whether production runs smoothly during busy periods.

They keep shifts organised, manage staff issues and respond when problems arise on the factory floor. In many sites, they also act as the link between senior leadership and production teams.

Because these roles affect so many parts of an operation, they usually take longer to hire and onboard than employers expect. When a hire does not work out, businesses then find themselves restarting the recruitment process while production managers cover shifts, engineers deal with preventable issues and communication between teams breaks down.

This is one reason why hiring solely on technical experience is ill-advised. Someone may have the right qualifications and industry background, but still struggle to manage people, deal with pressure or communicate clearly during difficult shifts or situations.

Those issues are rarely obvious just from looking at a CV, which is why recruiters should consider leadership style and cultural fit earlier in the process. Managers who fit the way a site operates are more likely to settle into the role quickly and maintain high standards.

That ultimately helps businesses avoid falling back into lengthy hiring processes while teams carry the pressure of an unfilled role.

The five-week approach to better hiring

When a role needs to be filled urgently, many businesses focus on getting candidates through the door as quickly as possible. Recruitment agencies often respond by sending over large numbers of CVs before they have properly assessed whether someone is right for the role or site.

This usually creates more work for hiring managers, who interview candidates who look suitable on paper but are ultimately a poor fit. Searches then restart, with a whole new round of interviews, and vacancies stay open for longer than expected.

Corvin Fox uses a five-week recruitment process to reduce that wasted time and narrow the shortlist earlier.

Week 1: Market scoping

The process begins with a detailed review of the wider talent market.

This includes looking at salary expectations, competitor hiring activity and where suitable candidates are currently working. The aim is to understand how realistic the search is before approaching candidates.

This also helps employers avoid common hiring problems, such as setting unrealistic salary expectations or targeting candidates who are unlikely to move.

Weeks 2–4: Screening and assessment

Candidates go through a more detailed interview process before they are introduced to the client.

Alongside technical experience, recruiters assess how candidates manage teams, communicate under pressure and respond to common problems during production.

This stage removes a large number of unsuitable candidates before client interviews begin.

Week 5: Final shortlist

Rather than presenting a high volume of CVs, the final shortlist focuses on candidates who are genuinely suited to the role and the site environment.

Clients also receive a clearer idea of how candidates are likely to fit within the business, so they can focus their time on the strongest matches rather than interviewing large numbers of broadly suitable candidates.

Prioritising cultural fit

A manager who performs well at one manufacturer may struggle at another, even if the role looks similar on paper. That is often down to the unique ways each site will operate.

Some sites require managers to make quick decisions and communicate directly during shifts. Others require them to spend more time coaching staff and building collaboration across teams. The pace of production, structure of the workforce and expectations from senior leadership all shape how people work together.

Those differences are not always clear during the early stages of a search, which is why recruiters need to spend time on site before assessing candidates.

Visiting the business gives recruiters a better understanding of the environment candidates will be stepping into. It also helps them identify the behaviours likely to work well within that team.

This does not mean businesses should only hire one type of personality. A manager who is more direct, for example, may still work well within a collaborative environment if they can adapt their communication style and build trust with staff.

The important thing is understanding whether someone will work well within the wider culture of the site as soon as possible in the hiring process. This helps businesses avoid costly hiring mistakes further down the line.

“Identifying the right person from day one removes a significant amount of the usual pain from the interviewing process. It’s rare to have this level of insight upfront, particularly around cultural fit, but having a clear understanding of how candidates communicate and work with each other means we can identify strong matches much earlier.

“This added layer of confidence means that, rather than reviewing candidates who may all be broadly suitable, we can significantly reduce rework and focus on finding the best fit.” 

Jared Turner, Recruitment Manager, Corvin Fox

Using psychometric testing to make better hiring choices

Psychometric testing can help employers understand how someone is likely to perform in a management role.

Behavioural assessments are often used across roles from shift management upwards. They help identify how candidates communicate, respond under pressure and manage interpersonal relationships.

For engineering and QA managers, General Intelligence Assessments (GIA) can help employers measure analytical thinking and problem-solving ability. Because these roles often involve processing information quickly, tackling problems and making decisions under pressure, GIA testing is a useful way to quantify a candidate’s aptitude for the role.

For more senior operational positions, Emotional Quotient (TEIQ) assessments can also help employers understand leadership style and people management strengths.

Psychometric testing should support recruitment decisions rather than replace human judgement. Used properly, it gives employers more confidence in the people they are hiring.

Why making the right hire early matters more under the Employment Rights Act

Changes introduced under the Employment Rights Act 2025 mean employers will soon have less time to decide whether a new hire is right for the business.

Under the Government’s current timetable, the qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims will fall from 24 months to six months from 1 January 2027. The Government also plans to remove the cap on unfair dismissal compensation.

This means the early stages of the hiring process really count, because businesses have less time to identify problems with a new hire, and less flexibility to restart the recruitment process without exposing the business to costly tribunal risks and disruptive turnover.

While a more structured, culture-first approach cannot remove hiring risk entirely – after all, issues with cultural fit do not reveal themselves immediately, and it can take months for new hires to fully understand their roles – it does give employers a stronger foundation to make the most informed decision they can, as early as they can.

Conclusion

Reducing time to hire in food manufacturing means spending less time on failed searches, wasted interviews and poor hiring decisions.

If you’re struggling to recruit effectively, start by reviewing how much time these problems are costing your business, then identify where a more targeted approach could help.

Our five-week recruitment process is designed to reduce the recruitment rework that slows hiring down. By narrowing shortlists earlier and identifying stronger long-term matches before interviews begin, manufacturers can avoid repeatedly returning to the market after unsuccessful hires – and build a team that truly reflects the culture of the business.

If you’re looking for a mid-level hire to take your food manufacturing business forward, contact the team at Corvin Fox.

Jared Turner 

Recruitment Manager