Talent Vertex Partners logo Talent VertexPartners
Free tool · for plant & project managers

What is that empty automation seat actually costing you?

Most teams track the cost of a wrong hire. Almost nobody tracks the cost of the seat that stays open — and on a live automation project, that is usually the bigger number. Set the four inputs below and see the exposure in your own figures.

Your open role

Nothing is sent anywhere. This calculates in your browser.

Sets a typical time-to-fill and salary band for that seat.
Later phases carry more schedule risk per week lost.
Pre-filled from the role. Override with your own number for a truer result.
Estimated exposure so far
₹0across 8 weeks open
Senior engineer time diverted₹0
Output not produced by the empty seat₹0
Schedule risk loading (phase)
Typical time-to-fill for this role
Still to run at current pace

Indicative only. This models the direct, defensible costs — diverted engineering time and lost output, loaded for project phase. It deliberately excludes liquidated damages, demobilisation cascades and the bid you could not make, because those are project-specific and we will not guess at them.

Talk it through — 20-min call →

How this is calculated

Three inputs drive the number, and each one is something you can check.

  1. Diverted senior time. When a seat is empty, someone more expensive usually covers it. We cost their diverted hours against a senior engineering rate derived from the CTC you entered, scaled by how much of their week is going to the gap.
  2. Output not produced. The seat was budgeted because the work has value. We treat the unproduced output as the loaded cost of the role — the standard, conservative way to value an unfilled position.
  3. Phase loading. A week lost during commissioning is not a week lost during design. Later phases carry a multiplier because the site date does not move.

What it excludes on purpose: LD/penalty exposure, demobilisation and remobilisation costs, and the revenue effect of work you could not bid. Those dominate the real number on large projects, but they are specific to your contract and we will not invent them.

Want this as a one-page breakdown you can forward?

We will send the figure with the assumptions written out — the kind of thing that survives being shown to a finance lead. No sales sequence; we reply once.

Your figures are included so we can comment on them. Confidential — never shared.

Why automation seats stay open longer

Engineering roles take materially longer to fill than general roles, and control-systems roles sit at the harder end of that range — the platform has to match, the project phase has to match, and the engineer has to have actually done it on a live plant. Add a technical offer-acceptance rate of roughly 73% against about 84% for business roles, and roughly one in four technical offers is turned down — so a failed search costs you the cycle twice.

Time to fill, engineering vs general roles~62 days vs ~44 daysSHRM / Genius, 2025
Cost of an open position~USD 4,000–9,000 per month in lost productivitySHRM, 2025
Technical vs business offer acceptance~73% vs ~84%Pin, 2026
Leading engineering rejection reasons"not enough experience" 16.3%, "missing skills" 15.4%Pin, 2026 (500K+ applications)
Salary bands used for defaultsTVP 2026 India automation salary guidePublished bands

If the number above looks wrong for your project, it usually means the search itself is built wrong rather than the market being empty. That is worth twenty minutes. See how we screen, or book a call.