Tough Staffing Decisions Every Leader Faces (And How to Survive Them)
Can we get real for a minute?
Leadership books love to talk about vision and culture — which is great. But they tend to skip over the part where you’re staring down two terrible choices, both of which feel like they’ll explode your team.
For example:
Do I put this half-trained newbie on the schedule tomorrow to save my veterans from burning out?
Or do I hold off, knowing my team might mutiny before the new hire is ready?
These are the real decisions. The gritty, sleep-stealing, please-send-coffee-now decisions that define leadership — especially in human services.
And while no blog post is going to magically erase these dilemmas, I do want to give you some perspective (plus a few tactics) to help you feel less alone in the mess.
Today, we’re looking at two of the nastiest leadership trade-offs, why they’re so tough, and how to make the smartest choice possible when neither option feels good.
Trade-Off #1: Fast Relief vs. Future Regret
(Do I fast-track my new hire or protect long-term retention?)
You’ve finally landed a new team member — cue the Hallelujah chorus! But here’s the catch: they’re technically “trained,” but they’re not fluent. They’ve checked the compliance boxes, but they haven’t built the confidence or behavioral fluency to thrive on their own.
And meanwhile, your team is drowning.
Your tenured staff are pulling doubles. Stress levels are climbing.
The temptation is real: get this new hire on the floor ASAP. Give your team some breathing room.
But here’s the behavioral science catch: what feels like relief now could quietly plant the seeds of future turnover.
When you rush onboarding, you risk:
The new hire feeling overwhelmed and unsupported (leading to early exits).
Costly mistakes or burnout contagion (“If the new hire isn’t ready, guess who’s still cleaning up the mess?”)
On the flip side, slowing down onboarding:
Gives the new hire time to build fluency and trust—and makes for a better employee experience for the new hire.
Prevents avoidable future fires—even though it may delay relief for an already-stressed-out system.
Aligns with best practices outlined by Forbes and other resources.
My Take:
Yes, your team is begging for relief. But short-term gain often leads to long-term pain. If you can afford even a slight delay — even a few extra shadowing shifts — you increase the odds that your new hire becomes a long-term contributor instead of a short-term headache.
Pro Tip: If you absolutely must fast-track, pair them with a “fluency buddy” for micro-coaching throughout the first weeks. It cushions the crash landing.
The fundamental choice: Will you break the vicious cycle? It takes courage, but it can be done.
Here’s how you can make it smoother:
Get really honest with your WHOLE team. Tell them you see the cycle and you’re committed to stopping it. Tell them it’s probably not going to feel better at first, but making a better experience for new hires will start to create better retention. (And don’t forget to apologize to those on the team who may have been thrown into the deep end too quickly.)
Commit to quality onboarding. Make a plan to get through at least three cycles of new hires with a better onboarding and ramp up period.
Eliminate the option to throw newbies in too quickly. It’s amazing how much creativity is sparked simply by embracing constraints. Maybe it’s using a temp agency, maybe it’s leadership rolling up their sleeves, maybe it’s something else. But don’t allow the option to short-cut a good onboarding experience.
Assess the results and make course corrections. Frequent check-ins with new hires and also with your veterans—along with tracking data—will tell you pretty much everything you need to know. If the 1.0 version isn’t working as planned, design a 2.0 and so on. You and your team will get it right if you stick with the process.
Trade-Off #2: Underperformer or Understaffed?
(Do I keep the struggling supervisor or face a leadership vacuum?)
Here’s a situation I see more often than I’d like:
You’ve got a supervisor who is… let’s say… high maintenance.
They’re technically filling a seat, but:
They require constant guidance.
They create more fires than they put out.
And they consume a disproportionate amount of your managers’ time.
You know removing them would create chaos. But keeping them feels like death by a thousand micro-crises.
Behavioral science has a term for this: the sunk cost fallacy.
You’ve already invested so much time and energy into this person that it feels painful to cut your losses. But here’s the thing: keeping someone who is draining your system can create invisible costs:
Team morale suffers ("Why is this person still here?")
You’re stuck in reactive mode, not proactive leadership.
And worst of all, your top performers quietly question their future.
My Take:
Rip the band-aid — but plan the wound care.
If you decide to transition this person out, do so with a plan to redistribute the load temporarily, communicate clearly with your team about the “why,” and map out a short-term relief strategy.
If you choose to keep them for now, set ultra-clear performance goals with tight feedback loops. No ambiguity. No “let’s see how it goes.” Either they improve, or you move on.
Bottom Line: Leadership Is Picking Between Imperfect Choices
Both of these scenarios boil down to this:
There’s rarely a “right” answer. But there is a way to make the wisest possible decision for your team and your future.
If you slow down and apply behavioral principles — like fluency building, clear feedback loops, and avoiding sunk cost traps — you give yourself the best chance of turning tough decisions into smart leadership moves.
And remember: you’re not alone in this. These trade-offs are normal, painful, and part of the leadership job description no one gave you.
Need more help with decisions like these?
Good news: this post is just the start. I unpack even more of these painful leadership trade-offs (plus real-world stories and humor, because we all need it) in Episode 27 of the IDD Leader Podcast.
And while you’re here, make sure you scroll down and sign up for emails that help you tackle turnover and lead your team with a little more confidence each week.
Because tough choices don’t have to be lonely choices.
© Nate Beers, IDD Leader
