I need to make better hiring decisions

Recruitment

Globally, companies are shifting toward data-driven hiring, but most tools still miss a critical factor: Can this person function in English in a real work environment?


Get in touch

In South Africa, this is amplified. Candidates may appear confident in conversation, but struggle with instructions, comprehension, and written communication.

As a result, you are not selecting for potential — you are selecting based on incomplete information. Many candidates meet formal requirements but struggle to apply them in real work environments.

The real hiring risk is often invisible at interview stage


From 14 years of data
  • Many candidates who “seem capable” fall below functional workplace literacy
  • Language gaps are one of the strongest predictors of training failure and poor performance

Social VS Workplace English

How the scale works

Language develops along a spectrum of 12 formal milestones — one for each year of schooling. Each milestone reflects the outcomes expected of a native speaker at that stage.

What the data shows

Across 16 725 candidates over 7 years, the average South African employee is comfortable at level 8 (dark purple).

Level 8 marks the ceiling of social English. Despite measurable improvement over the previous period (pink), the jump to workplace-level proficiency — level 9 and above — remains out of reach for most candidates.

Why this matters for hiring

Interviews happen in conversation. Workplace performance happens in writing, reading, and reasoning. Most hiring processes never test the gap between the two.

Impact

& Losses

  • Hiring the wrong people
  • High early turnover
  • Time lost in interviews and onboarding
  • Training people who were never going to succeed

In high-volume environments, this becomes a systemic cost problem

Hiring Cost Calculator

The real cost of a poor-fit hire

Smart selection costs thousands. A poor-fit employee costs hundreds of thousands — mostly through invisible operational friction. Adjust the sliders to model your organisation’s scenario.

Hires per year 40
Poor-fit rate (%) 20%
Cost per mismatch (R) R150,000
Assessment cost per person (R) R500
Mismatch reduction from assessment (%) 50%

Poor-fit hires / year

8

Annual mismatch loss

R1,200,000

Assessment investment

R20,000

Estimated annual saving

R600,000

Mismatch loss Assessment cost Estimated saving
Mismatch loss vs assessment investment and potential savings.

For every rand spent on assessment, you potentially save 30Ă— in avoided mismatch costs.

Figures are illustrative estimates based on your inputs. Actual results will vary by organisation and role type.

We need to screen large volumes quickly

Screen efficiently at scale
  • Quickly filter large candidate pools

We interview candidates who seem fine, but once they start working, they struggle.

Match candidates to role requirements
  • Place people where they can succeed

Smarter hiring starts here

I need to make better hiring decisions

My staff are struggling with English at work

We need to know why our learners aren’t succeeding

Explore a different pathway

Workplace Communication

Find out what’s really causing communication breakdowns →

Workforce Insight

Combine workforce data, diagnostic analysis, and industry insight to identify hidden gaps →

Reduce Training Failure

Measure readiness before the programme starts. →

Workforce Development

Help your people move from social-ready to workplace-ready. →