Use evidence to choose the constraint
Course overview · 4 min reading + 12 min practice, estimated
Principles and method
Map a small sample of real cases from entry to exit before choosing an intervention. Record elapsed time, active effort, rework and decision queues separately. An average conceals variation, so inspect the slowest cases and explain exclusions. The largest visible queue may reflect an upstream defect: interview feedback can be late because criteria were never agreed. Choose an improvement hypothesis that describes a mechanism, not a correlation. Estimate the cost of collecting more evidence and the cost of acting on a wrong conclusion. Prefer a narrow reversible test when uncertainty is high.
Worked example
In ten fictional searches, scheduling takes two days and shortlist approval takes eight. Seven approval delays involve rewritten briefs. Buying a scheduler would not address the main observed delay. The pilot introduces a signed brief before sourcing.
Put it into practice
Create a six-step timeline for three fictional cases. Identify one plausible constraint and one alternative explanation.
Use fictional information and keep your work in your own notes.
Compare your approach: self-review guidance
Show both waiting and working time. A defensible conclusion says brief ambiguity may cause approval rework, then checks whether interview availability or budget holds also explain the delay. Three cases inform a pilot, not an organisation-wide claim.
Sources and further reading
Original Academy teaching and fictional examples. These references provide context, not endorsement. Edition 2026.09; updated 2026-09-24.
- CIPD: Recruitment
Professional context for the recruitment lifecycle.