Over the last few days I have had calls from clients needing staff (both on a permanent and contract basis) because they have felt that their teams are now "seriously under-resourced" - which is a positive sign. However when I have the candidates immediately available and try to arrange interviews with HR teams, I am repeatedly hearing the same message: "I am sorry, Matthew. We just won't be able to interview all four candidates this week as we just don't have the resources".

I also heard from a colleague of mine yesterday who has been trying to get a particular piece featured in the media, that the only reason the article has not appeared has come down to the simple fact that the editorial team at the paper is ... you guessed it "under resourced".

Organisations have clearly found themselves in a bit of predicament. With the onset of the economic downturn, staff numbers were rapidly scaled back to a bare minimum without a second thought (I guess they felt they were over resourced at the time and had to watch costs very closely). However now they are feeling the repercussions.

Hopefully it won't have a knock on effect ... where companies now start to miss out on good candidates, customers go elsewhere if they feel they are not getting good enough service, and reputations are tarnished as the demand outweighs their ability to deliver.

Let's just hope HR remains HR and doesn't become known as HUR (Human Under Resources).

Food for thought ...