Quality of Hire in EMEA vs. US are measured and managed differently due to employment laws, cultural norms, and data practices. Having said that, both regions prioritize quality of hire.
Key Metrics and Regional Differences
1. First-Year Retention
This is a common quality of hire indicator—if a hire leaves or is let go within a year, it may signal a poor match. In the US, first-year attrition has exceeded 20% in recent years, driven by job-hopping and aggressive poaching.
In EMEA, turnover is lower, partly due to stronger job protections. For example, in France and Germany, companies often retrain or reassign underperformers rather than terminate them quickly.
US firms like Amazon use performance improvement plans (PIPs) to exit low performers swiftly. In Germany, Amazon must involve works councils and often negotiate separation agreements.
As a result, lower retention in the US may reflect proactive quality control, while higher retention in EMEA may include more borderline performers.
2. Performance and Productivity
US companies often use data—performance scores, sales metrics, etc.—to assess hire quality. Firms like GE US historically used forced ranking to identify weak hires.
In Europe, such practices are often resisted or restricted. However, global companies now apply consistent standards. Google, for instance, uses the same OKR and review systems worldwide.
If 90% of US engineers meet expectations vs. 75% in EMEA, that may flag a regional QoH issue. But overall, firms like Google and Microsoft calibrate hiring globally to maintain a consistent bar.
3. Hiring Manager Satisfaction
This subjective metric (e.g., “Would you rehire this person?”) shows regional variation.
US managers, under pressure to hire fast, sometimes report more mismatches. However, EMEA managers, with slower processes, often feel they’ve vetted thoroughly and report higher satisfaction.
Companies like Meta trace back performance reviews to interview feedback in both London and Menlo Park, refining hiring accuracy across regions.
Best Practices to Ensure Quality
Assessment Rigor
Amazon’s Bar Raiser program enforces hiring standards globally. In EMEA, Bar Raisers also act as cultural translators to avoid misjudging candidates due to communication style. Apple blends local and HQ interviewers to assess both cultural fit and alignment with company values.
Google, Apple, and Microsoft apply the same interview rigor globally. EMEA employers increasingly use probation periods and structured exits when needed. US firms are learning from EMEA’s investment in onboarding and training.
A standout example: Microsoft’s global inclusive hiring initiative trains interviewers to reduce bias and focus on competencies. This has improved quality of hire in EMEA by surfacing strong candidates from non-traditional backgrounds.
Probation Periods
EMEA countries often use 3–6 month probation periods to evaluate new hires.
US companies operate under “at-will” employment, allowing termination at any time.
EMEA firms like Siemens and SAP use probation pass rates as a quality of hire metric and invest heavily in onboarding to ensure success within that window.
Internal Mobility
EMEA firms often promote from within, reserving external hires for specialized roles.
GE EMEA fills leadership roles internally, while hiring externally for niche skills.
Tesla US scaled rapidly, leading to some mismatches. In Europe, Tesla screened thousands for its Berlin factory, partnering with local schools to ensure fit and readiness.
Data and Analytics
Companies like LinkedIn track a “Quality of Hire Index” across regions. At one point, LinkedIn’s EMEA tech hires scored higher than US counterparts, possibly due to smaller hiring volumes and more selective processes.
US teams often face pressure to scale quickly, which can stretch recruiting and dilute quality.
While companies rarely publish quality of hire by region, leaders like Amazon and Google insist their hiring bar is global. Through structured recruitment processes, cultural adaptation, and data-driven reviews, they strive to maintain consistent quality—regardless of geography.
In conclusion, both regions aim to hire great people who stay and perform. The US model allows fast correction of hiring mistakes, while EMEA’s model emphasizes getting it right the first time. This leads to more diligence upfront in Europe—more interviews, assessments, and onboarding support.
You May Also Like
What is Quality of Hire? →
Quality of hire gauges how well new employees perform and contribute
How to Improve Quality of Hire →
How to improve quality of hire, tapping into best practices from leading organizations
Time to Hire Best Practices→
Read 4 Practical ways to Improve Time to Hire
How to Manage Cost Per Hire →
Learn 3 ways High-performing firms improve hiring cost
Improve Candidate Experience →
Guide with 10 Ways To improve candidate satisfaction