FICTIONAL DEMONSTRATION · FOUNDER ADVISORY
A 90 day hiring capacity and budget plan
Three hiring scenarios with worked cost assumptions, recruiting capacity and founder decisions.
Download PDF · 3 pages ↗I'd approve the base plan in this example, with two searches and a firm check on interview capacity. It fits the assumed spending limit. The faster plan adds a third role but leaves almost no recruiting time for problems and exceeds the budget. More approved vacancies would not create that missing capacity.
The assumed company and decision
A fictional B2B software team needs solutions coverage for customer onboarding, stronger backend ownership and later QA coverage. The founder has an illustrative $100,000 first-quarter hiring budget. All salaries, start months, costs and workloads below are invented planning inputs, not market estimates or client results. A month is treated as one twelfth of annual pay for this exercise.
| Input | Annual base pay | Loaded monthly cost |
|---|---|---|
| Staff backend engineer | $180,000 | $18,750 |
| Solutions engineer | $150,000 | $15,625 |
| QA lead | $135,000 | $14,062.50 |
Loaded cost = annual base pay × 1.25 ÷ 12. The 25% allowance is an invented planning assumption. Add $3,000 per hire for one-time setup and recruiting costs. Equity, variable pay, agency fees and payroll timing are excluded. Finance would replace these inputs with the actual cost basis before an approval.
| Scenario and assumed starts | Loaded pay in quarter | One time costs | Quarter total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Slower: solutions M2; backend M3 | $50,000 | $6,000 | $56,000 |
| Base: solutions M1; backend M2 | $84,375 | $6,000 | $90,375 |
| Faster: solutions M1; backend M1; QA M2 | $131,250 | $9,000 | $140,250 |
These are scenario costs, not promised start dates. In the base case, solutions contributes three loaded months and backend two. A delayed start changes both the spend and the work the existing team must cover.
Check capacity before opening the searches
The internal recruiter has 12 protected search hours a week for 13 weeks, or 156 hours. These hours exclude other recruiting duties. The estimates below include preparation, research, candidate communication and process management for the agreed searches. They are illustrative effort budgets, not universal productivity targets.
| Search | Recruiter hours reserved | Interviewer hours reserved |
|---|---|---|
| Solutions engineer | 45 | 12 |
| Staff backend engineer | 60 | 20 |
| Optional QA lead | 45 | 12 |
| Base plan total | 105 | 32 |
| Faster plan total | 150 | 44 |
The base plan leaves 51 of the 156 recruiter hours unallocated. The faster plan leaves 6. That margin matters if calibration changes, someone withdraws or the team needs another evidence discussion. Unallocated hours are a planning reserve, not a claim that the work will finish early.
Interview timing is a separate constraint
The team can offer six interviewer hours a week. If all 32 base-plan hours are needed in the first four weeks, demand exceeds the 24-hour capacity by eight hours. Spread the interviews over at least six weeks, add named interviewer capacity, or adjust the sequence. Do not treat a quarterly capacity total as evidence that a particular week can absorb the work.
Worked recommendation to the founder
Approve solutions first and backend second, subject to the role briefs and budget confirmation. Finance confirms the $90,375 planning total. The engineering lead provides a six-week interview schedule. The founder names temporary QA ownership. Hold the QA vacancy until the next milestone review; the faster scenario is $40,250 above the assumed limit.
An assumption that could change the choice
If QA work is a release requirement that the current team cannot cover, revisit the two-role mix. Compare a solutions-plus-QA plan with the backend delay and its operating consequences. Do not add a third search while leaving the funding and interview shortfall unresolved.
A working 90 day review plan
| Review point | Accountable owner | Decision or evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Before opening | Founder and finance | Approve vacancies, cost basis and temporary coverage. |
| Weeks 1 to 2 | Hiring leads | Accept role outcomes, assessment evidence and interviewer reservations. |
| Weekly | Recruiting owner | Report stage evidence, capacity changes and decisions waiting on others. |
| Days 30 and 60 | Founder | Continue, change sequence or reduce scope using the milestone and remaining capacity. |
| Day 90 | Founder and finance | Review actual starts and spend separately from the original assumptions; choose the next quarter scope. |
Completed example decision record
D13. Proposed base plan: solutions M1 and backend M2. Basis: assumed onboarding need, $90,375 modeled quarter cost and 105 recruiter hours. Open dependencies: finance cost confirmation, six-week interview schedule and QA coverage. Owner: founder. Review trigger: a release requirement changes or an expected start moves. Status: proposed; this sample contains no actual approval.
Keep the plan useful when conditions change
Keep the original assumptions beside the updated ones. If a start moves, revise the cost and explain who covers the delayed work. If an interviewer becomes unavailable, reschedule the decision points before increasing the candidate flow. Report those changes without describing them as improved hiring performance.
How I would support the engagement
I could build and challenge the planning assumptions, help the founder choose the sequence and maintain the decision review. Finance owns cost approval; hiring leads own technical evidence and interviewer time. Sourcing, interviews and recruiting execution need an agreed scope and capacity.
Next step
Bring the next business milestone, approved spending limit and available team time. Agree on the decisions the plan must support before opening more roles.