Too much work, not enough people?

Public sector teams across New Zealand are being asked to deliver more in an environment shaped by tighter budgets, shifting priorities, ongoing restructuring, and heightened public expectations. Even as hiring activity has shown signs of recovery, many organisations are still dealing with the after-effects of a prolonged period of caution. For many teams, that has meant carrying heavy workloads with fewer people, while still being expected to maintain service standards and keep long-term programmes moving.

That pressure is not only operational. It is also cultural. When teams are under-resourced for extended periods, the effects can reach well beyond missed deadlines or slower delivery. Morale can dip, confidence can erode, and burnout risks can rise. In sectors where process, accountability, and public trust matter deeply, this creates a difficult balancing act. Leaders are not simply managing workloads. They are also managing uncertainty, fatigue, and the human impact of continual change.

“People are a little bit scared.”

On a recent NZ Market Update, Host NZ Managing Director Shannon Barlow was joined by Guest Wellington Branch Manager Peter Crestani to unpack what is happening across the public sector and why under-resourcing continues to feel so widespread. Their discussion pointed to a market that is active in parts, but still fragile beneath the surface. Peter described the current environment as something of a year of two halves, with stronger momentum returning after a quiet period, but caution likely to build again as the election draws closer.

One of the clearest themes from the conversation was that public sector hiring conditions remain uneven. Some roles are highly competitive and attract a broad field of applicants, while more specialised positions continue to be difficult to fill. Senior policy roles were highlighted as one example, particularly in the permanent space, where organisations may struggle to find candidates with the right depth of experience and direct government background. Even when vacancies are approved, hiring is not always straightforward. The talent may no longer be available, may have moved elsewhere, or may simply be reluctant to step into organisations facing uncertainty.

That caution is being compounded by structural disruption. Organisational mergers, election cycles, and ongoing reform can create a holding pattern for both employers and job seekers. People who might otherwise be open to a move are often staying put if they have stability, a strong manager, and a manageable role. That lower turnover can make already tight talent pools feel even smaller. In practical terms, it means that some teams may have approval to hire but still face long delays in finding the right person.

The conversation also explored why under-resourcing is being felt so sharply. In many cases, the workload has not reduced even when headcount has. Teams are still expected to deliver complex programmes, navigate layered approval processes, and respond to new priorities as they emerge. In some organisations, streamlining efforts are helping, but progress is inconsistent. That means pressure is not only coming from too few people, but also from systems and processes that can slow delivery and increase the burden on already stretched teams.

Another important insight was the risk of deeper workforce challenges beneath the immediate market pressures. Peter noted anecdotal signs of talent moving offshore, particularly among younger professionals in specialist areas. That kind of movement can create a longer-term capability issue, especially if experienced people leave and are not easily replaced. Combined with election-driven uncertainty and the complexity of changing large public systems, it suggests this is not simply a temporary resourcing dip. In some areas, it may reflect a broader challenge around how public sector work is structured, supported, and sustained over time.

For leaders, the discussion returned again and again to practical action. If budget is available and approval to hire has been given, delaying recruitment can place even greater strain on the people already carrying the load. But hiring alone is not the whole answer. Leaders also need to reassess priorities, review work programmes carefully, and stay close to the wellbeing of their teams. One of the most compelling takeaways from the discussion was the reminder not to lose the human element. Under pressure, it can be easy for delivery to dominate everything else. Yet regular check-ins, genuine support, and making space for recovery can be just as important as any operational decision.

Ultimately, the conversation painted a picture of a public sector that is moving forward, but not without significant strain. There are opportunities ahead, and there is clearly momentum in parts of the market. But there is also caution, complexity, and a need for thoughtful leadership. For organisations that want to navigate the year well, success may depend on how effectively they balance delivery demands with workforce care, and how quickly they respond when teams start showing signs of pressure.

What should leaders do now to support stretched public sector teams?

• Move quickly on approved hiring so teams are not left carrying unsustainable workloads for longer than necessary.
• Review work programmes and distinguish what is urgent from what can be delayed or deprioritised.
• Pay close attention to specialist skill shortages, particularly in roles where suitable permanent talent is limited.
• Build regular team check-ins into leadership routines so early signs of fatigue or burnout are not missed.
• Simplify processes where possible, especially approval layers that slow work and add unnecessary pressure.
• Keep the human element central by supporting morale, flexibility, and recovery during periods of ongoing change.