By Sam Tudgey, Senior Consultant, Stanton House

Across the finance market, I’m having more conversations than ever with organisations delaying recruitment decisions. Some are managing budget constraints. Others are navigating uncertain trading conditions. Increasingly, businesses are also questioning whether advances in AI and automation will reduce future headcount requirements.

These are understandable considerations. Every hiring decision is subject to scrutiny, and finance leaders are under pressure to control costs and maximise efficiency.

However, one assumption organisations should challenge is the belief that leaving a finance vacancy unfilled automatically saves money.

In reality, the cost of an unfilled role often extends far beyond the salary attached to it. While payroll expenditure may fall in the short term, the wider operational, commercial and people costs can build over time.

The question is not simply whether a business can afford to hire. It is whether it can afford the long-term cost of leaving critical finance roles vacant.

A vacant role does not remove the workload

One of the biggest misconceptions I encounter is the belief that when a role remains vacant, the business can simply operate without it for a period of time.

In reality, the workload rarely disappears.

Instead, responsibilities are redistributed across the existing team, often to individuals who are already operating at or near full capacity. Finance Managers take on Controller-level responsibilities. Financial Controllers absorb reporting duties previously handled elsewhere. Finance Directors find themselves balancing strategic leadership with day-to-day operational demands.

When organisations rely on existing employees to absorb additional responsibilities for prolonged periods, the risk extends beyond short-term productivity. Over time, it can contribute to disengagement and ultimately the loss of high-performing employees that the business can least afford to lose.

The wider impact should not be underestimated. Deloitte's workplace mental health research found that 63% of employees experienced at least one characteristic of burnout, while poor mental health is estimated to cost UK employers £51 billion annually through absenteeism, presenteeism and staff turnover.

While an unfilled vacancy is rarely the sole cause of burnout, prolonged understaffing can create the conditions in which it becomes more likely.

Delayed hiring often creates a bigger recruitment problem

Another common theme I am seeing across the market is organisations waiting for the "perfect" candidate.

The intention is understandable. Senior finance appointments are critical hires, and businesses want to make decisions that support the organisation for the long term. However, the pursuit of perfection can sometimes come at the expense of progress.

Multiple rounds of interviews, extended approval processes and changing stakeholder requirements can quickly turn a planned hiring process into a vacancy that remains open for months.

By the time the ideal candidate is eventually identified, the original vacancy may no longer be the only resourcing challenge. A prolonged process can put further pressure on the existing team and, in some cases, contribute to the loss of other high-performing employees.

AI Will Change Finance – But the Work Still Needs to Get Done

Alongside this, I am increasingly seeing organisations delay recruitment because they believe AI will reduce future staffing requirements.

There is no doubt that AI is already transforming the finance function. However, there remains a significant gap between ambition and implementation. Stanton House's AI Leadership Survey found that while AI has become a board-level priority, only 12% of organisations have fully rolled out an AI strategy. Microsoft's 2024 Work Trend Index reached a similar conclusion, finding that although AI adoption is accelerating, many organisations still lack a clear vision and implementation roadmap.

So, one of the most important questions finance leaders should ask themselves is: How long can your team realistically sustain additional responsibilities while waiting for those future efficiencies to arrive?

For many organisations, the answer is far shorter than they initially expect.

Under-resourced finance teams slow down the entire business

Finance functions are being asked to do far more than report historical performance.

Today, leaders are expected to provide commercial insight, strengthen forecasting and controls, manage risk and support strategic decision-making, often without a corresponding increase in resources.

This is why the impact of an unfilled finance role rarely remains within the finance department.

When teams become under-resourced, business-critical processes begin to slow. Month-end reporting takes longer to complete. Forecasts become less responsive to changing market conditions. Budgeting cycles require more time, and commercial analysis can struggle to keep pace with business demand.

The consequences extend beyond operational efficiency.

Accurate and timely financial information underpins effective decision-making. When finance capacity is stretched, leadership teams often have reduced access to the insights they need to act quickly and confidently. Decisions that should take days can take weeks. Investment opportunities may be delayed. Emerging risks may not be identified as early as they should be. Strategic initiatives can lose momentum while teams wait for the financial analysis required to move forward.

Ultimately, the impact can be felt across the entire organisation, affecting decision-making, operational agility and business performance. What may appear to be a headcount saving on paper can quickly become a much larger cost in lost productivity, delayed decisions and missed opportunities.

Looking beyond the salary line

There are often valid commercial reasons for delaying a hire. But the salary saved is only one side of the equation.

The more important question is what leaving that role vacant is costing the business in the meantime.

For finance leaders, that means looking beyond the headcount budget and considering whether the team still has the capacity and capability it needs to perform effectively.

Sometimes delaying a hire will be the right decision. But it should be an informed one.

How Stanton House can help 

If you are reviewing your finance hiring strategy, considering whether to replace a vacancy, or assessing the impact of resource constraints within your team, Stanton House can provide market insight, salary benchmarking and access to senior finance talent across permanent and interim markets. 

To discuss your finance team structure or hiring plans, please get in touch.