HR is often left out of AI plans, despite the need for upskilling and inclusio

 

 

 

By Carolyn Crist

As companies rapidly adopt AI tools in the workplace, HR and organizational leaders should be involved to ensure new changes can be implemented successfully, according to a June 17 report from McLean & Co. — but that’s not always the case.

“Despite playing a significant role in organizations, HR is being left out of the conversation on AI adoption,” according to the firm. That’s a mistake because HR leaders can help develop a strategic and holistic approach that considers the benefits, risks and objectives of AI use — while also maximizing return on investment and mitigating harms to reputation, security and inclusivity, it said.

“The AI strategy is the central point from which both technical and people-related AI activities originate,” Lisa Highfield, principal director of human resources technology and AI at McLean & Co., said in a statement.

“It provides the direction, guideposts, and priorities that inform the organization’s activities and enables a smooth execution to transform AI from an idea into reality,” she said. “However, introducing AI technologies can create tension within an organization, considering there are often differing views, competing priorities, and large volumes of change.”

That’s where HR and organizational leaders can play a role in aligning AI strategy with broader organizational goals, Highfield noted. A well-designed AI strategy can provide benefits such as an aligned vision and mission, proper governance, higher success rates with digital transformation and better ROI.

Without an informed strategy, though, companies could face risks such as technological dependence, unintentional bias and threats to data security, privacy and confidentiality.

The McLean & Co. report suggested several steps to navigate AI adoption, such as establishing an AI strategy steering committee, assessing current and target AI maturity, identifying AI use cases and values, and creating an AI roadmap based on organizational priorities.

Importantly, the report noted, leaders should communicate AI strategy and initiatives across employee groups to keep everyone informed and involved with the plan.

Upskilling should be part of the strategic plan and communication initiatives. In fact, employees of every position and background may need AI training, experts have told HR Dive.

About 90% of HR leaders believe up to half their workforce will need to be reskilled in the next five years as AI developments roll out, according to a PeopleScout and Spotted Zebra report. To do this, leaders will need to communicate their plans, address fears and ensure employees receive the training they need, the report found.

Workers want these training opportunities, too. About 57% of workers worldwide said they’re ready for reskilling and retraining in new roles amid AI developments, according to a Boston Consulting Group report. Job seeker interest in learning and career development has increased as well.

 

Source: ciodive.com

Why CHROs are the new C-Suite power players

 

 

 

By Lindsey Galloway

 

This is the first in Chief’s new series, The New C-Suite, which examines how rapidly-shifting workplace norms and technologies have impacted today’s top corporate power players — and what it means for executive women.

What do Mary Barra, CEO of General Motors, Leena Nair, CEO of Chanel, and Anne Mulcahy, former CEO of Xerox, all have in common? They all once served as HR leaders. Once relegated to the sidelines, HR and People leaders have become a pivotal part of the C-Suite, especially as remote work, ‘quiet’ hiring and firing trends, DEI initiatives, and other talent management functions have taken center stage in the corporate landscape.

According to data firm AON, the failure to attract and retain top talent comes in as the fourth largest risk to organizations today, a huge jump when compared to previous years when it didn’t even rank in the top 10. The need for an executive leader to manage that talent continues to grow, with 473 of the Fortune 500 having a Chief Human Resource Officer, and the role seeing a growth in average salary as well.

The function also continues to be dominated by women. Spencer Stuart research found that 70% of CHRO roles in the Fortune 500 are held by women, trailing only Chief Inclusion and Diversity Officer for sheer representation. Since the role interfaces closely with the CEO and every other department, the CHRO offers essential experience on the way to the corner office. Continue reading

How to Handle a Toxic Boss

 

 

 

 

by Manfred F. R. Kets de Vries

 

 

People don’t leave bad jobs they leave bad managers.

Naomi was troubled by recurrent nightmares. Each night, she found herself trapped in a dark parking lot with no exit, hiding from approaching footsteps. As a shadowy figure with a familiar face loomed closer, Naomi tried to run but her feet felt like lead. She’d wake up, drenched in sweat.

Through therapy and coaching, Naomi connected the dots between the subject of her nightmares and her overbearing boss. She realised that the constant anxiety she felt going into work stemmed directly from his demanding behaviour. Ironically, while her boss pushed for increased performance, his methods undermined her confidence and hindered her ability to deliver.

Workplace stress due to bad bosses is more common than most people realize. Dealing with bosses who behave inappropriately, set unrealistic expectations or are unsupportive of work-life balance unsurprisingly leads to negative health outcomes.

Toxic work environments have been linked to high levels of anxietydepressionpoor sleephigh blood pressure and even premature aging. High levels of work stress may result in unhealthy behaviours and habits, and spill over into personal lives, affecting the well-being of partners and children.

Bad bosses exist in all shapes and sizes, spanning from narcissists and bullies to micromanagers. Among them are those with extreme mood swings and unreasonable expectations, as well as those who hoard information, avoid conflict, never give positive feedback or are perpetually unavailable. These traits make them very difficult to work for.

Especially harmful are bosses who have both psychopathic and narcissistic traits. Driven by this “dark dyad”, they are often quite Machiavellian. They tend to exploit those they manage, take credit for their subordinates’ work, be overly critical and generally behave inappropriately. In addition to being a nightmare for individuals, bad bosses can significantly harm the overall work climate. Their demands and behaviours drain employees’ willpower and motivation, contribute to mental fatigue and impair performance.  Continue reading

Why CHROs are the new C-Suite power players

 

 

 

By Lindsey Galloway

 

This is the first in Chief’s new series, The New C-Suite, which examines how rapidly-shifting workplace norms and technologies have impacted today’s top corporate power players — and what it means for executive women.

What do Mary Barra, CEO of General Motors, Leena Nair, CEO of Chanel, and Anne Mulcahy, former CEO of Xerox, all have in common? They all once served as HR leaders. Once relegated to the sidelines, HR and People leaders have become a pivotal part of the C-Suite, especially as remote work, ‘quiet’ hiring and firing trends, DEI initiatives, and other talent management functions have taken center stage in the corporate landscape.

According to data firm AON, the failure to attract and retain top talent comes in as the fourth largest risk to organizations today, a huge jump when compared to previous years when it didn’t even rank in the top 10. The need for an executive leader to manage that talent continues to grow, with 473 of the Fortune 500 having a Chief Human Resource Officer, and the role seeing a growth in average salary as well.

The function also continues to be dominated by women. Spencer Stuart research found that 70% of CHRO roles in the Fortune 500 are held by women, trailing only Chief Inclusion and Diversity Officer for sheer representation. Since the role interfaces closely with the CEO and every other department, the CHRO offers essential experience on the way to the corner office.

Continue reading

High-Stakes Leadership: How CEOs Navigate Critical Decisions

 

 

 

by Simone Olbert, executive coach, and Natalia Karelaia , INSEAD

 

Strategies to help leaders make better, more confident decisions under pressure.

Imagine you are a CEO immersed in deep thought alone in your office. You need to make a high-stakes decision by the end of the week. You are under intense time pressure and feel that there is no single good choice. If you make a mistake, the result could be detrimental, both for the company and its external stakeholders. 

How would you approach such a difficult decision? Would you trust your gut, the data or both? What would be your guiding principles? Who would you involve in the decision-making process? Who do you trust enough to openly share your thoughts and emotions with? How can you gain more clarity about the right choice before it’s too late?

Leaders often find themselves at a critical juncture – be it deciding on major investmentsor the future of the company, handling mergers and acquisitions, responding to critical client issues or navigating organisational changes and crises. These situations demand not only strategic foresight but also the ability to manage stress and conflicting interests under pressure.

Common challenges of decision-making

A recent study we conducted provides insights into how leaders navigate high-stakes decisions. We asked 111 CEOs to share their experiences using both online questionnaires and interviews. The findings shed light on the personal and organisational hurdles that executives face when making difficult choices and highlight effective strategies to cope withdecision-making challenges.

The study participants spanned a diverse professional spectrum, and two-thirds had held a CEO position at least twice. Geographically, they were mainly based in Europe and Asia, with others spread across North America, the Middle East, Africa, Australia and South America. The companies they helmed ranged from small enterprises with annual revenues under €1 million to large conglomerates bringing in over €1 billion. Such diversity provided a rich backdrop for understanding the complex challenges of high-stakes decision-making in different business environments.   

The CEOs highlighted several personal challenges they faced when making crucial decisions. A significant number were concerned about striking the right balance between intuitive judgment and analytical thinking. Psychological pressure and the impact of personal biases also emerged as common issues, with many leaders fearing that their emotions could cloud their judgment.

Underlying organisational challenges were equally daunting. Over 65 percent cited balancing competing stakeholder interests as one of the most complex aspects of decision-making, while over 60 percent said that unpredictable market conditions and a lack of reliable data further complicated the process. Other factors included resistance to change within companies, a misalignment among the members of their decision-making team and difficulties with balancing risk and reward.

Continue reading