HR is one of the first areas to go with budget cuts - as a non-revenue generating part of the business, to some it makes complete sense. Yet the one thing that differentiates so many organisations in a highly competitive marketplace is the people - of that very few would surely disagree. Why then do so many organisations take such a short term view of HR cycles? Maybe it is down to the HR managers and directors who want to be measured over a 2-3 tenure before they look to move onwards and upwards. Maybe it's because business does not afford organisations the luxury of time to evolve its most fundamental asset.

Organisations should be looking to place at the highest level for a longer period - unlike football clubs who sack underperforming managers without them having a chance to prove themselves, it is the HR managers and directors who are making a rapid exit from organisations who only give them 2-3 years to deliver significant HR policies. Too many transient people are placed in roles that are fundamental to the ongoing development of a business and its objectives.

HR strategists need to be looking at a minimum three year and anything up to 10 year cycle to seriously address the issues companies face from a staff perspective. HR mandates that are to have any impact on the business should be taking no less than three years and training and development cycles around five if they are to bear fruit. Given that people are consistently given as the most important differentiator within organisations, the time taken to get HR strategies right so often doesn't reflect this.

Encouraging organisations to hire with a long term view may appear to be self defeating for a recruitment consultancy but as an organisation that places as much emphasis on retention and development, Hydrogen know that client satisfaction is pivotal to their business and ongoing success.