You’ve seen it happen: a job description (JD) is drafted, shared, and reviewed—and then it disappears into the void. Despite everyone’s best efforts, the job doesn’t get posted because the JD approval gets delayed. So, days go by, maybe even weeks. Everyone’s waiting, but no one’s sure on whom.
Welcome to JD approval purgatory—a frustratingly common delay in the hiring process. Therefore, it’s not just annoying; it’s also costly. Time lost at this stage affects your time-to-fill, slows down candidate pipelines, and also makes recruiters and hiring managers look inefficient.
According to SHRM, the global average time to hire is 44 days. That’s a two-week lag that many companies simply can’t afford when top talent is in short supply.
In a recent episode of The JD Fix podcast, host Heather Fenty explores the root causes of this delay. Combined with Ongig’s practical JD workflow guide, this blog post will help you understand the problem, implement fast fixes, and also optimize your hiring engine for the long haul.
What Is JD Approval Purgatory?
Heather shares the story of Jess, a recruiter at a large healthcare organization. Jess worked on a JD for a senior nursing leadership role. So, she sent the draft to the hiring manager, who made edits. Then, legal weighed in. Comp requested title changes. Then… silence.
“Honestly? I’m not even sure. I think we were all waiting for someone else to say ‘go,’” Jess explained.
It took 17 days before the JD went live.
Multiply that delay across 10–20 open roles, and you begin to see the actual cost, not just in hours but also in missed hires and frustrated teams.
Why Do JDs Get Stuck? (The 3 Big Problems)
1. No Clear Ownership
Without a clearly defined workflow, job descriptions bounce around between recruiters, managers, and legal teams. So, when no one owns the “green light,” the process falls apart.
Symptom: Everyone thinks someone else is moving it forward.
Fix: Assign one owner per stage: drafting, review, legal, and approval.
When ownership is ambiguous, even well-meaning teams operate inefficiently. Thus, JDs are often deprioritized in favor of more urgent tasks. So, assigning explicit responsibility and including accountability in your workflow documentation is key.
Ownership clarity also minimizes finger-pointing when deadlines are missed. A documented chain of command ensures that every stakeholder knows their role and when they’re expected to act.
2. Too Many Reviewers for JD Approval
Many teams overengineer the JD approval process. So, a mid-level role doesn’t need five rounds of feedback; the more hands involved, the longer it takes.
Symptom: Multiple departments slow down decision-making.
Fix: Tied your workflow by job type. Limit reviews to only the stakeholders who truly need input.
It’s important to note that not all roles need the same level of scrutiny. So, technical roles might need a review by a team lead, and regulated roles might need legal signoff. However, the same workflow should not apply universally. A tailored workflow keeps the pipeline moving and ensures critical eyes review only when required.
Too many reviewers not only cause delays but also introduce risk. Each additional reviewer can lead to conflicting feedback, diluted accountability, or scope creep that derails the JD entirely.
You can even define optional versus required reviewers, especially for business units that operate differently. Optional inputs can be managed asynchronously, while mandatory ones stay tightly scheduled.
3. Tools That Don’t Talk to Each Other
When you draft in Word, edit in Docs, comment in Slack, and store versions in SharePoint, chaos is inevitable. Version control breaks, deadlines slip, and the “final” version becomes a mystery.
Symptom: Different teams working from different platforms or files.
Fix: Centralize JD collaboration using a single source of truth—ideally in your ATS or a JD optimization platform like Ongig.
Indeed’s Workforce Insights Report revealed that 49% of job seekers already feel that application processes are too long or complex. A clunky, inconsistent JD experience only adds to that frustration and could discourage qualified candidates from applying.
This fragmentation doesn’t just waste time. It also leads to confusion, inconsistent messaging, and even publishing the wrong version of a job description. Therefore, tools should work together, not against each other. So, syncing JD processes into one shared platform makes hiring more efficient.
Standardizing tools and formats also helps new team members ramp up faster. Instead of navigating five different platforms, they follow a simple, centralized path.
Integrations are essential, too. For example, syncing Ongig with your ATS ensures that once a JD is approved, it goes live instantly—no duplicate work or manual transfers.
The Hidden Costs of a Broken JD Approval Process
JD approval purgatory doesn’t just stall job postings. It also causes cascading delays throughout the talent acquisition funnel:
- Longer time-to-fill
- Lost productivity from unfilled roles
- Hiring manager frustration
- Missed SLAs
- Poor candidate experience from inconsistent job ads
Research says top candidates are typically on the market for just 10 days. If your JD approval process takes longer than that, you’re already at risk of losing the best talent to faster-moving competitors.
Worse, it creates unnecessary stress for recruiters who often act as go-betweens for teams with unclear expectations.
It also impacts the employer brand. Candidates often see poorly written or delayed job postings as a reflection of internal disorganization. When that reputation spreads, it becomes harder to attract top talent.
There are also operational costs. HR and TA teams spend more time following up on approvals than sourcing or nurturing candidates, and the opportunity cost adds up quickly.
A Quick Fix: Build a JD Approval Checklist
Clarity is the first step toward better JD approvals.
Create a standardized checklist outlining each step and assigning clear ownership. This is not a high-tech solution—it’s a visibility one. So, here’s a sample:
Step 1: Recruiter drafts the JD
- Owner: [Recruiter name]
- Timeline: 2 business days
- With Ongig: Templates and AI writing assistance ensure consistent quality from the start.
Step 2: Hiring manager reviews
- Owner: [Hiring manager name]
- Timeline: 2 business days
- With Ongig: In-platform collaboration prevents version confusion and streamlines feedback.
Step 3: Legal/compliance review (if needed)
- Owner: [Legal contact]
- Timeline: 1–2 business days
- With Ongig: Automated bias, compliance, and readability checks flag issues early
Step 4: JD goes live
- Owner: [Recruiter or talent ops]
- Timeline: 1 day
- With Ongig: Auto-sync to your ATS and job boards for faster posting and tracking.
Need a template for the steps above? Click here to download the JD Approval Checklist
Benefits of Using a JD Approval Workflow Tool Like Ongig
Ongig offers integrated workflow automation and quality controls for JD creation and approvals.
So, here’s what their customers gain:
1. Faster Time-to-Fill
- Cuts approval times from weeks to days
- Live status tracking shows who’s responsible for each step
- No more “who’s holding this up?” guessing games
2. Quality + Compliance by Default
- AI highlights biased or non-compliant language
- Ensures brand voice and readability consistency
- Boosts candidate trust and legal safety
3. Better Collaboration
- Centralized feedback (no more scattered emails and Slack threads)
- Role-based permissions ensure that only the right people review
- One version = fewer conflicts
4. Measurable Optimization
- Built-in analytics track how long approvals take at each step
- Identify bottlenecks and process outliers
- Compare approval timelines across departments or hiring teams
Sample 4-Week Implementation Plan (from Ongig’s PDF)
| Week | Activity | Output |
| 1 | Document the current process | Current state analysis |
| 2 | Configure the Ongig workflow | Custom approval workflow |
| 3 | Train team members | Standardized process |
| 4 | Go live with the first jobs | Immediate time savings |
Communicate the “Why” to Stakeholders
Even the best checklist won’t stick if your team sees it as red tape. So, help hiring managers and execs understand why a faster, cleaner JD process matters:
- Improves hiring speed
- Boosts candidate experience
- Ensures legal and DEI compliance
- Frees up time for more strategic work
Use metrics and anecdotes to get buy-in. Show them a “before and after” of approval timelines. Celebrate early wins to build momentum. Also, consider setting JD approval KPIs to reinforce its importance.
Additionally, consider involving hiring managers in co-creating the workflow—this builds ownership and trust, and reduces resistance to process changes.
Final Thoughts: Create a System That Works for Everyone
Fixing JD approval purgatory isn’t just about speeding things up. It’s also about creating clarity, reducing confusion, and empowering every team involved in hiring to do their best work.
So, start with a checklist. Then, centralize your tools. Assign ownership. Also, educate your stakeholders. Then, layer in tech to scale your process efficiently.
A better JD process improves hiring. It also builds credibility, speeds alignment, and sets the tone for a smoother experience for everyone, from candidate to recruiter to leadership.
Why I wrote this
Whether you’re a recruiter juggling 10 open roles, a hiring manager who needs someone to onboard yesterday, or a legal partner trying to avoid risk, a clean, streamlined JD process benefits everyone. Explore how Ongig can help you automate your JD to save your team time, improve compliance, and deliver a better candidate experience. Contact us to schedule a demo.
