Executive Summary: 2012 In-House Physician Recruitment Benchmarking Report
By ASPR Benchmarking Committee
ASPR is pleased to announce that the 2012 ASPR In-House Physician Recruitment Benchmarking Report is now available. The newly published report is an annual study published by ASPR.
The goal of the report is to provide accurate and timely metrics that help in-house physician recruitment professionals better understand their industry and enable them to quantify and codify recruitment expectations with relation to organization size and type, population, geography, and other factors that impact recruitment results. These data will help an individual organization see national industry trends and provide a basis for comparison to similar institutions with respect to recruiter compensation, services offered, and overall processes and outcomes.
This Executive Summary provides a general overview of select key findings, based on confidential surveys voluntarily submitted by in-house physician recruitment professionals between December 2011 and April 2012. The Benchmarking Report includes a full compilation and analysis of: organizations that employ in-house physician recruitment professionals; searches performed during 2011; in-house physician recruitment professionals profile statistics; and compensation data for in-house physician recruitment professionals by various job titles. Please refer to the full report and searchable results for comprehensive information.
This year’s report includes data submitted from 151 organizations representing 4,808 searches conducted in calendar year 2011. For comparison purposes, results of the 2011 report for calendar year 2010 searches are often referenced. The 2011 report included 156 participating organizations representing 5,331 searches.
In comparing 2012 results to 2011, physician turnover was essentially unchanged, though organizations conducted more searches and employed more in-house physician recruitment professionals. The typical organization employed between 1 and 2 in-house physician recruitment professionals and conducted a median of 25 searches overall compared to a median of 18 searches per organization reported in the prior year.
The report shows approximately 68% of offers extended were accepted. A clear correlation exists between the facilities’ population size and acceptance rates, with offers from organizations in larger populations much more likely to be accepted than those in smaller populations.
This year’s results reinforce previous findings and trends in the ongoing need for primary care specialties, the increased difficulty in securing adequate coverage, and the massive shift in employment arrangements.
Survey data reflect the national trend toward organizational employment and away from the private practice and/or solo provider models. More than 70% of searches conducted were for practices owned by hospitals or integrated delivery systems.
Consistent with the previous year’s report, primary care specialties were the top five most common search specialties. It is worth noting that two of the top specialties were non-physician advanced practice providers. Of the 67 specialty categories tracked, the top five specialties were again reported to be family medicine, hospitalist, nurse practitioner, physician assistant, and internal medicine.
The median days to fill was 155 across all physician specialties (222 days on average) compared to a median of 120 days (208 days on average) in the previous year. The median time to fill for primary care physicians (family medicine, geriatrics, general and ambulatory internal medicine, internal medicine/pediatrics, urgent care, and general and adolescent pediatrics) was 151 days compared to 125 days last year. Days to fill for advanced practice providers, such as nurse practitioners and primary care physician assistants, was only 90 days for both the 2012 and 2011 reports.
A decline was seen in the number of searches that were filled (51% in 2012 vs. 60% in 2011) and an increase was seen in those that remained open at the end of the year (42% vs. 36% in 2011). Specialties that were least likely to be filled during 2011 were med-peds, neurosurgery, dermatology, urology, and otorhinolaryngology.
As reported last year, the average filled search (all specialties) involved four applicants, two interviews, and one offer. The most commonly cited sourcing mechanisms were Internet job boards (27%) and referrals (25%), which are consistent with last year.
Recruiter Profile and Compensation
In line with organizations conducting more searches overall in the 2012 survey compared to 2011, the typical physician recruitment professional also conducted more searches. Physician recruitment professionals conducted a median of 15 active searches (23 on average) compared to a median of 13 searches (18 on average) in the 2011 report.
The typical respondent has six years of recruitment experience and 83% are female. Respondents typically spend 90-99% of their time recruiting. Less than 25% supervise staff, and 42% have provider retention responsibilities.
More than 75% of respondents hold a bachelor’s degree or higher, with 27% holding a master’s degree or higher. Eleven percent of respondents are Associates of ASPR (AASPR), 7% are Diplomates of ASPR (DASPR), and 13% are certified as Fellows of ASPR (FASPR).
On average, in-house physician recruitment professionals earned total compensation of $71,033. For those who are certified as a Fellow of ASPR (FASPR), the average total compensation was approximately $17,000 more than for those who have not attained any ASPR Fellowship designation or certification.
Of the position titles for which a sufficient sample was available, the title “director, physician recruitment” was the most highly compensated. Those with the highest titles were more likely to receive bonuses. As could be expected, a correlation can be seen in higher compensation levels relative to ASPR certification/designation, advanced degrees, responsibilities for supervising staff, and years of experience.
The ASPR Board of Directors gives special recognition and expresses sincere appreciation for the contributions, dedication, and leadership of the Benchmarking Committee and Co-Chairs Shelley Tudor, FASPR (Humana, Louisville, KY) and Debbie Gleason, FASPR (The Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE).