---

TL;DR — Click to summarize

Wearing multiple hats works early. It does not scale.

We are the scrappy, the doers, the “I’ll figure this out if it takes all-nighter’s.” We are entrepreneurs! And that means, there’s a good chance we are also employers, which adds a whole new layer of complexity.

Growth is exciting, but from a people standpoint, informal HR practices, unclear ownership, and undocumented processes create risk. When HR lives in inboxes and people’s heads, hiring slows, onboarding breaks down, and leaders get pulled out of the business and into the weeds.

Hiring is often the first place this shows up. While not necessarily the root problem, it’s usually a sign that people systems haven’t kept pace with growth.

The fix isn’t red tape or heavy policies. It’s clarity: clear ownership, documented processes, and systems that allow leaders to get back to running the business.

Ready for practical next steps?
Click here to access The Practical HR Assessment for Growing Businesses →

Colleen Moore | HR/Talent Strategy Leader

Are your Hats weighing you down?

Growth is a good problem to have. And early growth rewards informality. If you’ve ever owned or led in a small business, you’re likely familiar with wearing multiple hats. It’s part of our entrepreneurial DNA. We are the scrappy, the doers, the “I’ll figure this out if it takes all-nighter’s.”

A marketing manager helps with onboarding paperwork. A manager oversees payroll and training. People step in where they’re needed, and for a time, this flexibility is your organization’s superpower. This is how our small businesses get up and running when we’re starting out on shoestring budgets!

 

When HR Lives in Individual Inboxes  

It’s not unusual for one person to “handle HR” even if they are not “HR.” When this happens, policies and people processes don’t live in a system; they live in that person’s email, saved as an attachment, or on a sticky note on the side of their computer monitor. The person becomes the go-to resource for everything from the employee discount program to system access. The business grows, responsibilities spread, and knowledge transfers informally. But with this, policies are interpreted differently, adjusted, and re-shared. Over time, multiple versions of the truth emerge. It’s the game of telephone. The result: no Leadership Alignment.

What leadership intends and what managers execute slowly drift apart.  

Growth continues, new people join, but knowledge transfer doesn’t always happen, and information becomes harder to find. New hires don’t know who the “go-to” person is, managers aren’t sure where to look for answers, and processes rely on relationships rather than clarity. 

One organization I worked with had stellar operations, smart, experienced leaders, and was in rapid growth mode. But critical HR tasks were handled informally and often by a single person. In one case, a manager handled new-hire system access across multiple platforms simply because they had always done it. Over time, that person continued to handle this task, and other employees involved in the onboarding process forgot about it.  It all “just worked.” When that employee left, it stopped working, and onboarding stalled.

This is what happens when people operations rely on memory instead of structure. Without documented processes and intentional knowledge transfer, even well-run organizations are vulnerable to disruption when key individuals move on. This approach is not scalable, no matter how many superstars you have on the team. And it’s also not practical to think you can or need to do it all yourself.   

Policies and Ownership (or lack of)

Hiring is often where breakdowns become visible, but it’s not the only area leaders need to watch as their organizations grow. Compliance and people operations slip away quietly when clear policies, ownership, and training don’t keep pace with growth.

Small gaps in the process can turn into real consequences. Employees may be disciplined inconsistently because managers aren’t clear on policy. New-hire paperwork may be submitted, but processed incorrectly because there is no defined handoff. The result can be unfair treatment (even if unintentional) or a new employee missing their first paycheck. Even setting legal risk aside, these situations erode trust, affect morale, and contribute to turnover.

From the Field

A long-tenured manager terminated an employee without documentation, formal warnings, or HR involvement. At the time, there was no policy on terminations.

The decision resulted in a wrongful termination claim and exposed a breakdown in process and ownership: no process or policy on terminations and no ownership on coaching the manager on what should have happened. As a result, the issue went uncorrected, and a similar termination occurred again.

The organization ultimately clarified its approach by requiring an HR review for terminations outside of its strict attendance policy violations. Managers also received training on policies, documentation, and having difficult conversations. These actions established clear accountability, reduced risk, and ensured managers received appropriate support with high-impact decisions.

Own a Piece or Own the Process?

Responsibilities are often distributed with good intentions. Different teams and leaders step in to help where they can. Over time, however, ownership becomes fragmented.

This shows up in subtle but costly ways.

Fragmented recruiting processes can cost quality candidates, unnecessary turnover, and lost productivity. Suppose a process where managers might review applications and make initial calls and sometimes HR does this. In some organizations, I’ve even seen senior leaders or CEOs step in to screen candidates.

Several organizations I’ve worked with could not clearly answer who owned each step of the hiring process or when handoffs were supposed to occur. Human Resources assumed managers were moving candidates forward, and managers assumed HR was handling follow-up. While everyone wants to help, without clear ownership, candidates receive inconsistent communication, timelines slip, decisions are delayed, and accountability simply does not exist, resulting in frustration on all sides.  

The root cause of these issues is typically not performance, but rather the lack of shared processes, timelines, and accountability.  

If everyone owns a piece of the process, no one owns the process.

Onboarding is another common pressure point. The process often spans multiple teams: recruiting initiates paperwork, HR manages compliance documents, payroll sets up pay, IT provisions access, managers handle training and orientation. In theory, this division of labor makes sense. In practice, when handoffs aren’t clearly defined, tasks fall through the cracks, and no one is quite sure where breakdowns occur. You can have division of labor, but expectations, policies, processes, and accountabilities must be clear and documented.

I’ve seen the same pattern with employee relations issues. Some leaders handle issues independently, while others notify HR and expect them to take over. These differences might stem from a manager’s experience level or comfort handling difficult conversations, but they’re just as often the result of inconsistent training, varied interpretations of policy, or a lack of awareness that formal processes even exists. Again, the process is disjointed, job roles become blurred, and employees receive inconsistent treatment.

There is no one to blame here. Simply put, processes evolve organically, responsibilities shift, and assumptions replace documentation.

Compliance and Trust do Co-Exist  

HR challenges rarely start as crises. They begin as small oversights: an outdated policy, a missing form, inconsistent training records.  

As organizations grow, those oversights multiply.  

Unless you are HR, you likely see compliance as a box-checking exercise, but have you ever thought of it as the foundation of trust? Employees want to know that they’re treated fairly and consistently, and managers want guidelines on how to make decisions and when they need to escalate situations. When compliance is weak, trust erodes, and leadership shifts its attention again from growth back to damage control.  

Reactive HR systems pull leaders into constant emergency fire-fighting mode. Proactive systems create space for performance, development, and culture.  

Growing Pains  

Leaders may first feel the strain of growth in hiring needs and practices when all of those hats start to weigh them down. Hiring speed and consistency then become even more critical to operations. But this strain rarely occurs in isolation. The same gaps show up with onboarding, policy application, and employee experience, and all ae signs that the company has reached a new stage of growth.

Well-designed HR processes create clarity across the employee lifecycle from recruiting and onboarding to policy application and employee relations. Organizations that invest in repeatable processes consistently see measurable improvements. In my experience, businesses that invest in people systems see results such as:

• Reduced time-to-hire by standardizing hiring workflows, clarifying ownership between teams and eliminating stalled handoffs without sacrificing candidate quality.
• Lower compliance risk and fewer escalations with clearly documented policies and defined decision authority.
• Stronger onboarding and early retention outcomes by centralizing onboarding processes, clarifying cross-functional responsibilities (HR, payroll, IT, managers), and ensuring new hires are set up for success.
• Increased manager confidence and consistency by training leaders on people processes, escalation expectations, and policy application, which reduces ad-hoc decisions and restores trust across teams.

The right systems don’t add bureaucracy. They reduce friction. They allow leaders and operators to spend less time troubleshooting and more time running the business, developing people, and planning for what’s next.

And the solution doesn’t have to be complex. Even small steps like centralizing policies, standardizing onboarding, or documenting decision ownership can significantly reduce risk, improve consistency, and enhance the overall employee experience.

The Turning Point  

How do you know you’ve reached the turning point?  

Ask yourself:

Are leadership meetings dominated by staffing, onboarding, or HR issues?

If your strategy and growth meetings are dominated by discussions on hiring delays, onboarding gaps, or operational HR issues, it may be a sign that people systems haven’t kept pace with the business.

Are senior leaders spending more time putting out fires than working on the business?

When executives are in the weeds resolving day-to-day HR issues because no one else clearly owns the process, strategic planning, business development, and long-term thinking tend to stall.

Do critical processes rely on individuals rather than documented systems?

If progress slows or stops when a key person leaves the organization, goes on vacation, or takes a sick day, or if leaders step in because “no one else knows how this works,” the organization has likely outgrown its informal approach to people systems.

If you answer “Yes” to any or all of these questions, it’s time to take a strategic look at your people operations.

Why Moore Consulting LLC  

Moore Consulting LLC was founded to support organizations at this exact stage of growth, when flexibility has reached its limits and leaders need structure without a lot of red tape. 

For more than a decade, I’ve partnered with growing organizations to design and implement practical HR and talent systems that reduce risk, improve hiring and candidate experience, and support long-term growth.  

It’s not about adding layers. It’s about creating clarity.  

Next Steps  

If your organization is growing and your HR functions are feeling strained, it may be time to take a closer look.  Learn more about how Moore Consulting LLC can support your growing business.  

Learn more about working together

Take the HR Assessment for Growing Businesses