Scope the role before you cost it
A business case built on a job description is fragile. The process that holds up starts by meeting well before hiring begins to map out objectives, scoping the role against workload gaps, ROI and risk-management success metrics, and the business obstacles you expect next.[1] Those four inputs are the case.
Framed that way the conversation changes. You are not asking for headcount, you are naming what the business currently cannot see and what it costs to keep not seeing it.
| The weak case | The case that holds up | |
|---|---|---|
| Workload | "The team is busy" | Name the specific gaps: what is not getting done, and what it costs the business that it is not. |
| Risk | Rarely mentioned | What the business cannot currently see, and the consequence when that surfaces in a raise, an audit or a board meeting. |
| Horizon | Scoped to today | Scoped to the next 24 months, so the hire grows into the role instead of needing replacing in a year. |
Hire for the next 24 months, not the next 24 weeks
The most useful framing I give founders is to hire for the next twenty-four months rather than the next twenty-four weeks, by assessing whether a candidate can see what the next version of the role looks like before that conversation is forced on them.[2] What you are buying is not only capability today, it is the capacity to grow into what the role becomes.[3]
That is also the cheaper path. A hire who tops out in a year means running the search again, and the second search costs more than the salary difference would have.
Hiring too late is the common error
Founders worry about hiring too early. In practice the opposite is more common: for Series A startups with $5m to $15m raised, a head of finance is the typical hire, and hiring too late at this stage is one of the most frequent mistakes founders make.[4] The cost of being late is invisible until something breaks in a raise or an audit.
I set out the signals that say the role has arrived, stage by stage here.
Put the cost of a mishire in the case
The downside belongs in the business case as much as the upside. The true cost of a bad hire in a startup extends well beyond salary, covering time, attention, momentum and morale, and typically delaying resolution of the underlying problem by another three months.[5] That is why founders are prepared to pay a premium for judgement: the financial and operational cost of the wrong hire is significantly higher than any salary difference.[6]
It also argues for structure over heroics. Pair the senior hire with transactional support underneath rather than asking one person to cover both, which is the most common way a well-justified hire still fails.
I set out what that support structure looks like and what each layer costs here.
Common questions
How do I justify a finance hire to my board?
Scope it against workload gaps, ROI, risk-management success metrics and the business obstacles you expect next, rather than on headcount or how busy the team feels. That reframes the conversation from asking for a person to naming what the business currently cannot see and what it costs to keep not seeing it.
What level should I hire at?
Hire for the next twenty-four months, not the next twenty-four weeks. Assess whether a candidate can see what the next version of the role looks like before that conversation is forced on them. What you are buying is not just capability today but the capacity to grow into what the role becomes. A hire who tops out in a year means running the search twice.
Is it worse to hire too early or too late?
Too late, in practice. For Series A startups with $5m to $15m raised a head of finance is the typical hire, and hiring too late at that stage is one of the most common mistakes founders make. The cost of being late stays invisible until something breaks during a raise or an audit, at which point it is expensive and urgent at the same time.
Should the cost of a mishire go in the business case?
Yes, because it is usually the largest number in it. The true cost of a bad hire in a startup extends well beyond salary: time, attention, momentum and morale, plus roughly three months of delay in resolving the underlying problem. That is why founders pay a premium for judgement, since the operational cost of the wrong hire exceeds any salary difference.
References
- Story Recruitment process: meeting the hiring manager well before hiring starts to map out objectives, scoping the role against workload gaps, ROI and risk management success metrics, and anticipated future business obstacles.
- Tom Hunter advises founders to hire for the next 24 months, not the next 24 weeks, by assessing a candidate's capacity to understand what the next version of the role looks like before the conversation is forced.
- Tom Hunter: when making a finance hire, founders should look for not just capability today but the capacity to understand what the next version of the role looks like.
- Tom Hunter: for Series A startups with $5M-$15M raised, a Head of Finance is the typical hire, and hiring too late at this stage is one of the most common mistakes founders make.
- Tom Hunter: the true cost of a bad hire in a startup extends far beyond salary, encompassing time, attention, momentum and morale, and typically delaying resolution of the underlying problem by another three months.
- Tom Hunter: founders are prepared to pay a premium for a finance professional's judgment because the financial and operational cost of making the wrong hire is significantly higher than any salary difference.