Blog

Hiring Complexity Series - #1

Are we protecting the business, or quietly holding it back?

When we're building a business, hiring is rarely just a recruitment decision. It's a financial commitment, a leadership decision and, often, an emotional one. Every new salary increases our fixed costs, so we tell ourselves that if we can manage for another month, another quarter, or until the next milestone, we'll have more certainty. We continue to absorb the work ourselves, postpone projects that aren't urgent, ask the team to stretch a little further, and reassure ourselves that it's only temporary. In many cases, this works for a while. After all, resourcefulness is part of building a company, and doing more with less is often what gets us through the early stages. Those decisions protect the business in the short term. The challenge is recognising when they begin to limit it in the long term.

The question becomes: How do we recognise the point where waiting is no longer protecting the business, but quietly holding it back?

What is waiting already costing us that we can't easily see?

When we think about hiring, our attention naturally goes to the salary because it's the most visible cost. The harder costs to recognise are the ones that build up over time. A customer waits longer than they should, a product launch slips because we simply don't have the capacity to move faster. We postpone improvements we know are important because everyone is focused on keeping the business running. We spend evenings doing work that someone else could own if that capability already existed. Individually, these feel like ordinary compromises, collectively, they become the way the organisation adapts to a capability it no longer has.

None of these moments appears significant on a financial report, yet together they can become the reason growth starts to slow. The challenge is that we often think we're delaying a hire to save money, when in reality we may already be paying for that missing capability in less visible ways.

Are we really deciding about headcount, or about capability?

As organisations grow, there comes a point where working harder stops creating better outcomes. That's usually when the conversation needs to change.

Instead of asking whether we can afford another salary, we need to ask what the business is no longer able to achieve because a particular capability doesn't exist. That doesn't mean every busy team should hire, hiring too early can create its own problems. The real decision isn't simply whether to add another person, it's whether the organisation has reached the point where a missing capability is becoming a constraint on its growth.

Here's the shift: instead of asking "Can we afford to hire?", ask "What capability is the business missing today, and what is it already costing us?"

Hiring is rarely just an investment in another person. At its best, it's an investment in the organisation's ability to keep moving forward. Sometimes the most expensive decision isn't making a hire. It's waiting until the organisation has already begun adapting to a limitation that no longer needs to exist.