Why “Just Hire More People” Is the Wrong Q1 Strategy
In hospitality, Q1 always tempts leaders into the same conclusion:
We’re stretched. Let’s hire more people.
It feels logical. Service levels matter. Guest complaints are costly. And no one wants managers covering shifts again. But in today’s labor environment, over-hiring in Q1 is often a strategic mistake—one that creates new risks without solving the underlying problem.
The issue isn’t effort. It’s volatility.
Q1 Forecasts Lie (Especially in Hospitality)
Q1 planning assumes stability that rarely exists. Occupancy projections shift. Group business moves. Banquets cancel or book late. Weather, travel patterns, and budgets all collide.
Hiring full-time staff based on optimistic forecasts means staffing for peak demand that may only materialize intermittently. When occupancy softens or events don’t land as expected, labor quickly becomes misaligned—and expensive.
Hotels don’t fail because they lack people during peaks. They struggle because they carry too many people during valleys.
Over-Hiring Turns Demand Swings Into Margin Erosion
Housekeeping is a perfect example. Staffing for 90% occupancy sounds responsible—until you spend weeks hovering at 70%. Rooms still need to be turned, but not at the same volume. Suddenly, hours are being cut, morale dips, and managers are juggling schedules instead of focusing on quality.
The same happens with banquets. Hiring permanent staff to cover irregular event volume leads to idle time between functions, rushed prep when volume spikes unexpectedly, and frustration on both sides.
Over-hiring doesn’t create stability. It locks in costs while demand remains fluid.
Idle Labor Hurts Culture and Performance
Underutilized staff is rarely neutral.
When housekeepers are short on rooms, or banquet servers are waiting for shifts to appear, engagement drops fast. Strong employees feel their time is wasted. Managers invent work to justify hours. Service consistency suffers—not because people don’t care, but because the system is misaligned.
Being slightly lean with smart backup is often healthier than being overstaffed and inefficient.
“Hire More” Masks Broken Staffing Models
When callouts pile up or managers are constantly filling gaps, the instinct is to add headcount. But in hospitality, these problems usually signal something else:
Schedules that don’t match check-in/check-out patterns
Staffing plans built around averages instead of peaks
Too much reliance on overtime instead of flexible coverage
Hiring more people may reduce pain temporarily, but it delays fixing the model that caused the pain—and makes later corrections harder.
Hospitality Needs Elasticity, Not Headcount
Modern hotel operations require staffing strategies that stretch and contract with demand.
That means:
Core teams sized for typical occupancy
Flexible labor for spikes, large groups, and short-notice events
Coverage plans that assume callouts will happen
The strongest operations aren’t “fully staffed” at all times. They’re appropriately staffed—with options.
The Better Q1 Question
Instead of asking, “How many people should we hire?” hospitality leaders should ask:
Where do we need consistency, and where do we need flexibility?
Q1 isn’t about locking in headcount. It’s about resetting assumptions.
Because in a volatile demand cycle, hiring more people doesn’t reduce risk—it concentrates it.