Why it’s time for HR Business Partners 2.0文章中强调了人力资源商业伙伴（HRBP）从通才到战略顾问的演变。最初旨在将人力资源战略与商业目标对齐，HRBP经常被日常运营任务分散注意力。Kathi Enderes 主张通过加强培训、指导和系统性的人力资源方法来复兴这一角色，这种方法整合了商业咨询能力。她引用了TomTom和乐高集团的例子，这些公司已成功地将其HRBP角色转变为更具战略性、数据驱动和有效促进业务增长和创新的角色。文章指出，只有11%的公司完全整合了这种模式，但见证了更高的增长和创新。
Kathi Enderes的观点强调了在当今由AI驱动的市场中，将HRBP转变为战略顾问不仅是一种改变，更是一种必需。
Global Industry Analyst Kathi Enderes, SVP of Research at The Josh Bersin Company, sees the need to clear the dust off a 30-year great idea of HRBPs.
Expert Insight
HRBPs are a crucial part of the success of the HR functions, and organizations as a whole.
However, as Kathi Enders, SVP of Research at The Josh Bersin Company, shares in this exclusive OpEd, they need to move from being a jack of all trades to becoming a business savvy consultant.
Here's how to achieve this!
Thirty years ago, HR embraced a groundbreaking concept: the HR Business Partner (HRBP).
The idea was that these professionals would collaborate closely with business leaders and line managers to align people strategies with the organization’s broader business objectives.
This remains a crucial concept and a contribution that organizations desperately need.
The problem is that somewhere along the way, we lost sight of the strategic part of the equation.
As a result, we’ve ended up misusing resources and devolving the role of the HRBP into a much more tactical, and less globally impactful, function.
In fact, the HRBP role is the most critical, yet the most misunderstood, of all HR jobs.
But by refreshing and modernizing the original concept and investing in HRBP capabilities, we can revitalize the role and get it back to its even more strategic purpose.
How we got here, and where we have to go next
We introduced HRBPs when we transitioned to the tiered HR service delivery model in the 1990s.
Originally, the HRBP was envisioned as a crucial connector between the various HR Centers of Excellence (COE) and the business.
But before too long, a lot of operational tasks were loaded onto their plates by business managers who needed immediate assistance with less strategic, day-to-day issues—think, “I need to hire someone but don’t know how to submit the requisition in the system,” or “I need to transfer someone: can you help me with that?”
When this happens frequently, the HRBP unintentionally becomes more of an HR workflow admin assistant.
While this helps solve short-term issues, it detracts from the original strategic intent of the role.
Consequently, many HRBPs end up not working “at top of license”—acting more like HR generalists than the specialized, strategic partners they could be.
To get things on track and empower HRBPs to grow into the strategic role you hired them for (and what they came on board to do), look to:
accept and encourage them to become business consultants, not just advisors or general admins, and support them in developing strong relationships with business leaders and the rest of HR
build the level of HR business partner capabilities they need to do that
organize their roles in new ways, and communicate clearly how you expect them to operate and contribute.
Leading the development of this critical in-house resource
It’s important to emphasize that all three elements noted above are crucial to the success of HRBPs – and they are interconnected.
Implementing just one recommendation won’t achieve the desired outcomes.
Equally importantly, this isn’t about increasing headcount costs; it’s about enhancing the training and utilization of the people you already have.
Indeed, in some organizations, there are significant numbers of HRBPs; myself and The Josh Bersin Company have worked with organizations where there are 200 or more in place.
So, the mission of the CHRO is to develop them, help them build the right relationships across the business, give them the support they need, and consciously organize them for success.
For capability development, some of that investment will go towards formal learning programs.
However, a significant portion will also be dedicated to facilitating mentorships and fostering connections.
This approach works best by consciously placing HRBPs in project roles where they can expand their knowledge and gain valuable exposure.
How to move to next-gen HRBP ground-level support
A Systemic HR approach, a concept The Josh Bersin Company introduced to the market last year, can be the driver of transformation here.
Why? Because by its very definition, Systemic HR transforms HR from a siloed service provider into an integrated, consultative function that tackles a company’s most pressing business challenges.
By doing so, the HRBP evolves from an HR ‘jack of all trades’ to a highly-skilled, data- and technology-savvy business consultant.
According to our research, only 11% of companies operate a truly Systemic HR function, so there is huge opportunity here – and these organizations have much higher company growth, delight their customers, innovate more, and create a great place to work.
Next-generation HRBPs can accelerate the journey towards Systemic HR and drive successful business outcomes.
However, to achieve this, you must be prepared to both pose and find answers to questions such as:
What are my new-style HRBPs’ specific accountabilities?
What does success look like?
How will our newly-energized and skilled-up HRBPs interact with managers and leaders?
Evidence from front-rank organizations, like TomTom, a geolocation technology company that specializes in mapping, navigation, and real-time traffic information services, suggests a move to a more integrated, fully data-driven, Systemic HR framework can deliver significant benefits.
In its case, TomTom has strategically restructured its HRBP team, moving away from a traditional, rigid HR model to a more fluid, team-based approach.
Its HRBPs are now organized into cross-functional teams that operate with flat hierarchies, allowing for quicker decision-making and more responsive HR practices.
Its HRBPs also now sit on the HR strategy and strategic business partnering team, which also includes HR strategy, people analytics and insights, HR portfolio management, and organizational development.
Working across this group, collaborating with the business, and supporting the highest-priority initiatives makes the HR function much more impactful.
Through this organizational model, TomTom ensures that its HRBPs are well-equipped to support the organization’s dynamic needs, driving effectiveness and efficiency.
Achieving ‘Master Builder’ HRBP capability
TomTom is not the only one looking at a new way to utilize HRBPs. Famous Danish toy leader The LEGO Group has taken a proactive approach to building HRBP capabilities.
Specifically, it implemented a series of initiatives aimed at enhancing business acumen, leadership skills, and understanding of complex organizational dynamics.
This includes specialized training programs to equip HRBPs with skills in change management, organization design, and coaching and developing leaders.
This new approach to the HRBP also centers on supporting their participation in cross-functional projects so as to develop a deeper understanding of its multiple business units and achieve a truly holistic view of the organization.
Doing so broadens their perspective and enhances their ability to contribute to strategic discussions and initiatives. This is an approach many other organizations can and should explore, as it’s a great way to develop full-stack HRBP capabilities.
In summary, HRBPs are incredibly important to organizational success, but along the way, we lost sight of how to maximize their potential fully.
As businesses accelerate under the influence of AI and other factors, this oversight becomes a luxury we cannot afford.
Therefore, the CHRO must prioritize developing HRBPs to enable their business to outperform competitors, nurture talent, and cultivate the innovation-driven organization necessary to thrive and endure.
原文来自：https://www.unleash.ai/strategy-and-leadership/why-its-time-for-hr-business-partners-2-0/
头条
2024年08月31日
头条
Care.com因夸大工作数量和收入，被诉向FTC支付850万美元和解金美国联邦贸易委员会（FTC）对Care.com采取了法律行动，原因是该公司在其平台上关于照护工作的可用性和潜在收入的广告中存在误导性陈述。这些广告经常夸大了工作的数量和可能的收入，同时还使用户难以取消他们的订阅。根据和解协议，Care.com必须支付850万美元用于消费者退款，并且要求公司未来在做出收入声明时必须实事求是，并简化订阅取消流程。此举不仅保护了消费者权益，也促进了更为诚信的市场环境。
近日，美国联邦贸易委员会（FTC）与在线护理服务平台Care.com达成了一项重要的和解协议。此次和解，Care.com将支付850万美元，用于赔偿因其误导性广告和复杂的取消流程受损的消费者。
FTC指控Care.com在其平台上发布的护理工作的可用性和潜在收入方面存在误导性信息。此外，Care.com的订阅取消流程复杂，迫使消费者无法轻易取消服务，从而违反了消费者权益。
对此，Care.com表示，尽管公司对FTC的指控持有异议，并有信心通过法律途径争取正当权益，但最终决定选择和解，以避免长时间的诉讼消耗公司资源。Care.com强调，和解不代表对FTC指控的认可，公司的主要目标仍是为美国家庭及看护工作者提供高质量的服务。
Care.com回应称，他们一直致力于透明和公平地展示工作机会和薪资信息，任何误导消费者的行为都不符合公司的业务宗旨。关于FTC提出的取消订阅问题，Care.com承诺将进一步简化流程，确保消费者能够轻松管理其订阅。
此外，此次事件也引起了业界对护理经济透明度和公平性的广泛关注。随着护理服务需求的增加，消费者对透明度和公平交易的要求也日益增强。业内专家指出，此类和解案例可能会推动行业内更多的自我监管和改进，从而提高服务质量和消费者满意度。
长期以来，Care.com已在全美各地提供服务，帮助数百万家庭找到合适的看护资源。公司表示，尽管面临FTC的指控和和解，但会继续扩展其服务，确保为更多家庭和看护工作者创造价值。
FTC方面也表达了对和解结果的满意，认为这是保护消费者权益的重要一步。FTC表示将继续监督市场，确保所有企业都能遵守公平竞争和诚实宣传的原则。
总之，此次和解不仅解决了Care.com与FTC之间的法律纠纷，也为护理服务行业树立了一个公平交易和消费者保护的标杆。未来，Care.com及同行业的其他公司可能需要在确保广告真实性和提供消费者友好服务方面做出更多努力。
附录Care.com 的回应新闻稿
CARE.COM RESPONSE TO FTC AGREEMENT
At Care.com, we put our members first, providing valuable tools and resources to help families find care and caregivers find jobs.
Though we were fully prepared to litigate for the next several years if necessary and confident in our position, we decided to enter into an agreement with the FTC to resolve this matter now and keep our focus on helping our customers.
This settlement is in no way a validation of the FTC’s claims. In fact, the settlement requires no material change in how Care.com serves those who use its platform.
At a time when the care economy is under assault, when families are draining their savings to afford child care, when caregivers are leaving the profession and when our growing senior population is facing astronomical long term care costs, it is disappointing that the FTC has chosen to attack trusted businesses who are part of the solution.
We have been in business nearly 20 years, available in every state and every town in America. That kind of longevity and scale comes from putting customers first every day; helping millions of families access the care they need and connecting millions of caregivers with meaningful, well-paying jobs.
In response to the FTC’s press release, we wanted to clarify a few facts:
The presentation of available job opportunities: We would not be in business for long if we manipulated optics, inflated statistics and attempted to trick our customers. We have found that many care seekers prefer to see a level of interest in their job post before committing to a premium membership, and our basic service tier offers this “try before you buy” opportunity. When a seeker sees the array of caregivers available, the commitment to premium membership—which enables seekers to contact and hire caregivers—follows naturally.
Earnings data: Care.com does not set rates and we never make promises about earnings. The data we provide about posted rates is based solely on what families say they are willing to pay, which varies significantly. Given the size of our platform, the potential earnings data we provide is at scale, and helps maintain a balanced and fair market for care.
Cancellation process: Families and caregivers can and do cancel memberships at any time and for a variety of reasons, including having successfully found a caregiver or a job. Our members can easily cancel if they wish, and we are further streamlining the process for doing so. Cancellation instructions for desktop and mobile users are included in every confirmation email upon sign up, accessible in our Help Center and available through our Customer Care support team which also offers 24 hour support via chat.
Given the care crisis in America, we believe our collective energy as a country should be on solutions, not nitpicking attacks. Care.com intends to keep our focus on what matters: American families and the hardworking caregivers who support them.
头条
2024年08月26日
头条
德州联邦法官全国范围内推翻联邦贸易委员会禁止竞业限制协议的禁令On August 20, 2024, a federal judge in Texas struck down the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) nationwide ban on noncompete agreements, ruling that the ban exceeded the agency's statutory authority and violated the Administrative Procedure Act. This decision, just 15 days before the ban was set to take effect, marks a significant victory for employers, particularly in the healthcare sector, and a setback for medical workers who anticipated increased job mobility and wage growth. The ruling also aligns with concerns from the American Hospital Association and other industry groups regarding the potential disruptive impact of the ban. The FTC is considering an appeal, but the ruling emphasizes the ongoing legal challenges surrounding the agency's authority to regulate noncompete agreements.
德克萨斯州一位联邦法官周二推翻了联邦贸易委员会（FTC）对雇佣合同中竞业限制协议的禁令，裁定该禁令违反了《行政程序法》并超出了该机构的法定权限。
这一裁决适用于全国范围，并在禁令原定于9月4日生效前15天作出。
美国德克萨斯北区地方法院的艾达·布朗法官上个月已经做出裁定，初步禁止FTC的竞业限制禁令，但仅限于本案的原告。
然而，布朗法官在8月20日的决定中完全取消了这一规定，因为她写道，APA“并未考虑针对特定当事方的救济”。
这一决定是对美国商会——全国最大的商业游说团体——的胜利，商会与一家税务公司一起提起了诉讼。
对于医疗行业而言，这一裁决则是喜忧参半。禁令原本被认为可以帮助被限制性合同束缚的医生、护士和其他医疗工作者更容易换工作，并可能促使工资上涨。
据美国医学会称，大约35%到45%的医生受到竞业限制协议的约束。
然而，关于禁令仍有一些悬而未决的问题，包括FTC是否有法律权力颁布此禁令、是否适用于非营利性医院以及它将如何影响并购活动、医生短缺和招聘工作，特别是对较小的地区系统。
强烈反对这一禁令的强大医院游说团体——美国医院协会，对法官的决定表示了赞扬。
“这一规定是监管权力的惊人宣示……更糟糕的是，委员会没有尝试理解它对医院、卫生系统以及他们所服务的患者所产生的破坏性影响，”AHA总法律顾问查德·戈尔德在与Healthcare Dive分享的声明中说。
与此同时，FTC发言人维多利亚·格雷厄姆表示，FTC正在“认真考虑”上诉。
格雷厄姆指出，布朗的裁决并未阻止监管机构通过个案执法来追究过度限制性的竞业限制协议。
今年4月，FTC以3票对2票通过了这项禁令，该禁令将使所有现有的竞业限制协议（除了一些高级管理人员外）不可执行，并禁止签订新的此类合同。两位共和党委员投票反对这一禁令，认为FTC没有国会授权来实施它。
在周二的裁决中，布朗法官认为《联邦贸易委员会法》确实赋予FTC“制定规则以排除不公平竞争方法”的某些权力，但该机构“没有创建实质性规则”的权力，比如竞业限制协议禁令。
这一观点得到了这样一个事实的支持，即国会没有为某些FTC法规的违反规定制裁措施，“这表明缺乏实质性效力”，她说。
布朗还得出结论认为，FTC的禁令在《行政程序法》意义上是任意和反复无常的，因为它不合理地过于宽泛且没有合理解释。
法官表示，该机构未能为其决定禁止所有竞业限制协议而不是针对具体有害协议提供证据。
布朗的裁决与7月23日支持FTC的宾夕法尼亚州联邦法官的裁决相冲突，该法官拒绝阻止禁令。上周，佛罗里达州的一位联邦法官也对禁令发布了有限的禁令，认为FTC可能超越了其法定权限。
这些不同的裁决表明，FTC是否有权禁止竞业限制条款的问题可能会面临上诉审查。
头条
2024年08月24日
头条
【推荐】专注移民及公司法的LYD Law，受邀出席10月北美华人人力资源年会在即将到来的10月北美华人人力资源年会中，LYD Law将与北美华人HR行业专家们齐聚一堂，深入探讨企业在合规管理和员工移民方面面临的挑战与机遇。凭借丰富的法律经验和专业知识，LYD Law致力于为企业提供量身定制的法律服务方案，助力企业稳健发展，保障员工权益。
1. 关于LYD LAW
成立于2015年，LYD LAW坐落于加州硅谷，是一家专注于提供优质移民及公司法律服务的律师事务所。我们专门为企业提供定制的员工签证解决方案，通过先进的软件平台有效减轻人力资源部门的工作负担，并保证对客户疑问的快速准确回应，让您的企业运作更加顺畅。
2. 关于李媛迪Brandy Li （Attorney at LYD Law）
Brandy Li拥有加州以及纽约州律师执照，在美国法学院获得法律博士 (Juris Doctor)学位。李律师曾在新泽西州高等法院担任法官助理, 其后分别供职于纽约和旧金山的大型律师事务所，参与了各类移民类案件的全程办理。她曾成功的在EB5投资移民（直接投资以及区域中心投资），H1B工作签证，EB1A杰出人才移民，L1/EB1C跨国公司经理，家庭移民，婚姻移民等领域为客人取得了满意的结果。李律师连续三年获得美国路透社 Super Lawyers ”超级律师“ Northern California Rising Stars。她曾受邀在2022全美移民律师协会(AILA)年度会议作为杰出人才申请专家授课，并曾担任美国政治播客”选美“客座讲师。
扫码参会：
赞助合作：
Annie Huang （Marketing & Cooperation）
邮箱：nacshr818@gmail.com
National Advertising Division Finds Certain Deel Payroll and HRIS Claims Supported; Recommends Others be Modified or DiscontinuedBBB全国项目的国家广告部（NAD）对Deel公司在其薪资和人力资源信息系统（HRIS）方面的广告声明进行了审查，回应了竞争对手Rippling提出的挑战。NAD认为，Deel的部分声明，如“每年节省高达$20,000”和“行业领先的全球薪资软件”是有依据的。然而，NAD建议修改或停止某些其他声明，特别是关于与Rippling的比较、法律合规性和客户支持的声明。NAD认为，Deel的“本地化”和“内部运营”薪资服务声明需要进一步澄清，并建议调整对Rippling的比较方式。此外，NAD要求停止使用“全球HR市场领导者”的称号，因为没有确凿证据支持这一说法。Deel已表示将遵守NAD的决定，进一步确保其广告的真实性和透明度。此次审查反映了NAD对广告真实性的持续关注，确保消费者能够获得准确的信息，同时促进公平竞争。
In a challenge brought by competitor People Center, Inc. d/b/a Rippling, BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division determined that Deel, Inc., in connection with its Payroll and Human Resource Information System (HRIS), provided a reasonable basis for certain claims, including Deel’s “save up to $20,000 per year” claim and accompanying chart, as well as the claim that Deel has an “industry leading global payroll software.”
New York, NY, Aug. 08, 2024 -- In a challenge brought by competitor People Center, Inc. d/b/a Rippling, BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division determined that Deel, Inc., in connection with its Payroll and Human Resource Information System (HRIS), provided a reasonable basis for certain claims, including Deel’s “save up to $20,000 per year” claim and accompanying chart, as well as the claim that Deel has an “industry leading global payroll software.”
However, the National Advertising Division (NAD) recommended that Deel modify or discontinue certain other claims, including comparative claims versus Rippling’s native payroll software, legal compliance, and customer support.
The parties are human resources and payroll service providers that offer multiple services.
Native and In-House Payroll Claims
Rippling challenged claims about “native” and “in-house” payroll systems that appeared in charts on Deel’s website:
“Payroll service is native and operated in-house in every country – Deel ✓, Rippling X”
“Payroll service is native and operated in-house in every country – Deel ✓ Yes, Rippling X No, they currently use partners in some countries.
The National Advertising Division (NAD) determined that customers could reasonably take away the message that native payroll includes native payroll software. Further, customers may reasonably take away the message that Rippling does not offer in-house and native payroll in all the countries in which it offers global payroll (outside of employer of record).
Therefore, NAD recommended that Deel modify these claims by clearly and conspicuously defining what “native” means and clarifying that the comparison with Rippling also includes countries where they offer payroll as part of their employer of record services.
Industry-Leading Payroll Claim
Deel claims on its website to have “[i]ndustry leading global payroll software” and, in a smaller font, “Deel is a leader in multi-country payroll and contractor payments, according to G2 user reviews.”
The National Advertising Division (NAD) determined that the phrase “global payroll software” means that Deel offers payroll software globally—whether that is in-house or through a third-party. Further, NAD considered the language and the context in which the “industry leading” language appears and concluded the claim does not convey a superlative message. Consumers are likely to take away the message that Deel is among the top in the industry, but not necessarily the best.
Since the record indicates that Deel has significant revenue, market presence, and a large global footprint, and there is no dispute that Deel and Rippling are among the many leaders in the global payroll market, NAD concluded that this claim was not false or misleading.
HRIS Comparative Claims
Rippling challenged claims on Deel’s website that customers can “[s]witch to Deel HR and save up to $20,000 per year.” An accompanying chart below the claim lists seven product features with Rippling and Deel displaying checkmarks for each feature. The chart states that Deel is “Free for companies with less than 200 employees” while Rippling costs “$8 employee/month.”
The National Advertising Division (NAD) concluded that because both products offer the touted features, it is not misleading to characterize Deel’s software as having those product features and that the product comparison chart is not misleading.
HRIS Superlative Claims
The National Advertising Division (NAD) determined that there was no evidence in the record to support an unqualified claim that Deel is #1 in the market. Therefore, NAD recommended that Deel discontinue the claims:
“The market leader in the Global HR space.”
“Build confidence in your compliance with the #1 Global HR platform.”
Preference Claim
The National Advertising Division (NAD) determined that data relied on by Deel is not a good fit for its claim that “Teams prefer Deel over Rippling for global HR and Payroll” because it did not indicate a preference for one product over another. Accordingly, NAD recommended that the claim be discontinued.
Compliance Claims
Rippling challenged claims about legal compliance that appeared in charts on Deel’s website:
“Network of 200+ local legal hiring experts around the world -- ✓ Yes, Rippling X No”
“Compliance document collection for contractors, on top of EOR, constantly reviewed and updated.”
The National Advertising Division (NAD) determined that in context it is reasonable to take away the message that Rippling has an inferior network of legal experts around the world, and it does not offer compliance document collection. Since Deel submitted no evidence in support of these two claims, NAD recommended it discontinue the comparative part of these claims as they relate to Rippling and cease conveying the messages that there are legal risks associated with using Rippling products and that Rippling’s products are not compliant.
NAD noted that nothing in its decision would prevent Deel from advertising its network of local legal hiring experts or comparing its compliance services to Rippling’s so long as they do not claim that Rippling lacks a network of 200+ local legal hiring experts around the world or compliance document collection for contractors.
Customer Support Claims
The National Advertising Division (NAD) determined that the comparative claim that Rippling does not offer multi-channel support is not false or misleading.
However, NAD concluded that the unqualified claim, “Deel’s support is in-house, reliable, and faster than Rippling” is not supported and recommended that it be discontinued or modified to make clear the circumstances and times when its support would be faster and avoid conveying the message that Rippling’s customer support is unreliable.
Further, NAD determined that Deel’s claim “Same level of service in every country with centralized communications – Deel ✓ Yes, Rippling X No, as they use partners in some places,” is not supported because there is no evidence about the level of service provided by Rippling in any country. Therefore, NAD recommended that the claim be discontinued.
During the proceeding Deel permanently discontinued and modified certain claims. Therefore, NAD did not review these claims on their merits and will treat the claims, for compliance purposes, as though NAD recommended they be discontinued.
In its advertiser statement, Deel stated that it will comply with NAD’s decision.
All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive. This press release shall not be used for advertising or promotional purposes.
About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs, a non-profit organization, is the home of U.S. independent industry self-regulation, currently operating more than a dozen globally recognized programs that have been helping enhance consumer trust in business for more than 50 years. These programs provide third-party accountability and dispute resolution services that address existing and emerging industry issues, create a fairer playing field for businesses, and a better experience for consumers. BBB National Programs continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in arenas such as advertising, child-and-teen-directed marketing, data privacy, dispute resolution, automobile warranty, technology, and emerging areas. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.
About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. The National Advertising Division reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy, delivering meaningful protection to consumers and leveling the playing field for business.
头条
2024年08月10日
头条
Josh Bersin: When Will The Trillions Invested In AI Pay Off? Sooner Than You Think.近年来，生成式人工智能（GenAI）的投资已达数万亿美元，但围绕其回报问题的争论不断升级。一些分析师，如麻省理工学院教授达隆·阿西莫格鲁（Daron Acemoglu）和纽约大学心理学与神经科学教授加里·马库斯（Gary Marcus），对AI的经济影响持悲观态度，认为其对美国生产力和GDP增长的推动作用有限，甚至可能导致市场崩溃。相反，另一派如高盛的全球经济学家则乐观地认为，AI有望在未来十年内大幅提高生产力。然而，文章指出，生成式AI的真正价值在于其特定领域的应用。例如，Paradox和Galileo等HR技术平台通过高度专业化的解决方案，显著提升了招聘和人才管理的效率。最终，文章强调，AI行业仍处于早期阶段，成功的关键在于找到具有专注性和精确性的创新解决方案。
In the last few weeks there has been a lot of concern that Gen AI is a “bubble” and companies may never see the return on the $Trillion being spent on infrastructure. Let me cite four analyst’s opinions.
Will Today’s Massive AI Investments Pay Off?
MIT professor Daron Acemoglu estimates that over the next ten years AI will impact less than 5% of all tasks, concluding that AI will only increase US productivity by .5% and GDP growth by .9% over the next decade. As he puts it, the impact of AI is not “a law of nature.”
On a similar vein, Gary Marcus, professor emeritus of psychology and neural science at New York University, believes Gen AI is soon to collapse, and the trillions spent will largely result in a loss of privacy, increase in cyber terror, and a lack of differentiation between providers. The result: a market with low profits and big losses.
Goldman Sachs Head of Equity Research Jim Covello is similarly pessimistic, arguing simply that the $1 Trillion spent on AI is focused on tech that cannot truly automate complex tasks, and that vendors’ over-focus on “human-like features” will miss the boat in delivering business productivity. (He studies stocks, not the economy.)
And Goldman Sachs Global Economist, who is a fan, estimates that AI could automate 25% of work tasks and raise US productivity by 9T and GDP by 6.1% over the next decade. He follows the traditional business meme that “AI changes everything” for the better.
What’s going on? Quite simply this new technology is very expensive to build, so we’re all unsure where the payoffs will be.
Buyers Are Looking For A Return Soon
If we discount the work going on at Google, Meta, Perplexity, and Microsoft to build AI-based search businesses, which make money on advertising (Zuckerberg essentially just said that in a few years AI will guarantee your ad spend pays off), corporate IT managers are asking questions.
An article in Business Insider pointed to a large Pharma company that cancelled their Microsoft Copilot licenses because the tool was not adding any significant value (Chevron’s CIO was quoted similarly in The Information).
Another quoted a Chief Marketing Officer who stated Google Gemini’s email marketing tool and the new AI-powered ad-buying tool performed worse than the human workers it was intended to replace (or support).
Given that these tools almost double the “price per user” for the productivity suites, I think it’s fair that CIOs, CMOs, to expect them to pay for themselves fairly quickly.
What’s Going On? The Big Wins Will Be Domain Specific
As with all new technologies that enter the market quickly, “the blush on the rose” is over. We’ve been dazzled by the power of ChatGPT and now we’re searching for real solutions to problems. And unlike the internet, where research was funded by the government, there’s going to be a lag (and some risk) between the trillions we spend and the trillions we save.
Given that ChatGPT is less than two years old and OpenAI has morphed from a research company into a product company, it’s easy to see what’s happening. Every vendor and tool provider is narrowing its AI “strategy” and not just pasting little AI “stars” on their websites, looking for useful things to do. And this process may take a few years.
In the world of HR, I think we can all agree that a “push the button job description generator” is a bit of a commodity. However if the AI analyzes the job title, identifies the skills needed through a large skills engine, and tunes the job description by company size, industry, and role, then it’s a fantastic solution. (Galileo does this, as does SeekOut, SAP, and some other vendors.)
The more “specific” and “narrow” the AI is, the more useful it becomes. Generic LLMs that aren’t highly trained, optimized, and tuned to your company, business, and job are simply not going to command high prices. So while we all thought ChatGPT was Nirvana, we’re now figuring out that highly specialized solutions are the answer.
Let me give you some examples.
The first is the platform built by Paradox, a pioneering company that started work on AI-based recruiting agents in 2016. Paradox, now valued at around $2 Billion, delivers an end-to-end recruitment platform that automates the entire process of candidate marketing, candidate experience, assessment, selection, interview scheduling, hiring, and onboarding. Most people believe its a “Chatbot” but in reality it’s an AI-powered end-to-end system that radically simplifies and speeds the recruitment process in a groundbreaking way. Companies like 7-11, FedEx, GM, and others see massive improvements in operational efficiency and both candidates, managers, and recruiter adore it. It took Paradox eight years to build this level of integrated solution.
The second is our platform Galileo. Galileo, which is now licensed by more than 10,000 HR professionals, is a highly tuned AI agent specifically designed to help HR professionals (leaders, business partners, consultants, recruiters, and other roles) do the “complex work” HR professionals do. It’s not a generic LLM: it’s a highly specialized solution designed specifically for HR professionals, and we’ve added specialized content partners and are building special integrations with other HR platforms. Our clients tell us it’s saving them 1-2 hours a day.
The third is the platform HiredScore, that was recently acquired by Workday. Founded in 2012, the HiredScore team built tools to help identify “fit” between individuals and jobs, and tuned its AI to be highly explainable, unbiased, and very easy to use. It took Athena Karp and the team a few years to nail down the use-cases and user interface but now HiredScore is considered one of the most powerful recruitment “orchestration” tools in the market, and is also used for internal hiring and many other applications. Every customer I talk with tells me it’s essential and saves them months of manual, error-prone effort.
The fourth is the platform Eightfold, which was invented in 2016 as a way to build “Google-scale” matching between job seekers and jobs. Through many years of engineering, product management, and ongoing sales process the company has become the leader in a new space called “Talent Intelligence,” now a billion dollar rapid-growing category. The company is about ten years old and now has some of the world’s largest companies building their hiring, career management, and talent management processes using AI. Companies like EY, Bayer, and Chevron now use it for all their strategic talent programs.
Each of these vendors, including others like Gloat, Sana, Arist, Lightcast, Draup, Uplimit, Firstup, and hundreds of others have patiently taken the power of Generative AI and applied it with laser precision to their solutions. Each of these companies is different, and as we work with them we see lightning bolts of innovation: not in AI itself, but in finding new ways to solve problems and do what I call “crawling up the value curve.”
This is the path for AI in the coming years. As with all new technologies, the “trough of disappointment” is always followed by the “bowling pin” of hitting the nail on the head. Innovators, entrepreneurs, and startup founders are the ones who will take GenAI and apply it in unique ways to solve problems. And soon enough, “AI-powered” will be a phrase we barely even need to say.
The Best Solutions Will Be Narrow Not Wide
GenAI solutions require a large “platform” of data, infrastructure, and software. That alone is not where the value resides. Rather, the big productivity advantages come after years of effort, focusing the data sets and working with customers to find the features, UI designs, and data sets that add enormous value. And we are still in the early stages.
If you want to learn more about HR Technology and AI, join me at the HR Technology Conference on September 24-25 in Vegas, or at Unleash in Paris in October 16-17. While I can’t predict who will win the core AI platform game (Microsoft, OpenAI, Google, Meta, Amazon will fight it out), I can predicts this: Generative AI will deliver massive improvements in business productivity. You just have to shop around a bit and wait for just the right solutions to arrive.
头条
2024年08月10日
头条
Agency Law and the Workday Lawsuit
文章讨论了在Workday诉讼中，代理法的相关法律问题。原告声称，Workday的AI筛选工具因种族、年龄和残疾而对他进行了歧视。这起案件提出了HR技术供应商是否可以对歧视性结果直接负责的问题。法律的复杂性包括AI在招聘决策中的角色、代理责任以及对雇主和AI开发者的潜在影响。此案件提醒雇主在实施AI招聘工具时要谨慎，并确保避免法律风险。AI开发者也必须确保其产品无歧视行为，因为该诉讼可能会树立重要的法律先例。
Editor's Note
Agency Law and the Workday Lawsuit
Agency law is so old that it used to be called master and servant law. (That's different from slavery, where human beings were considered the legal property of other humans based on their race, gender, and age, which is partly why we have discrimination laws.)
Today, agency laws refer to principals and agents. All employees are agents of their employer, who is the principal. And employers can have nonemployee agents too when they hire someone to do things on their behalf. Generally, agents owe principals a fiduciary duty to act in the principal's best interest, even when that isn't the agent's best interest.
Agency laws gets tricky fast because you have to figure out who is in charge, what authority was granted, whether the person acting was inside or outside that authority, what duty applies, and who should be held responsible as a matter of fairness and public policy.
Generally, the principal is liable for the acts of the agent, sometimes even when the agent acts outside their authority. And agents acting within their authority are rarely liable for their actions unless it also involves intentional wrongs, like punching someone in the nose.
Enter discrimination, which is generally a creature of statute that may or may not be consistent with general agency law even when the words used are exactly the same.
Discrimination is generally an intentional wrong, but employees are not usually directly liable for discrimination because making employment decisions is part of the way employment works and the employer is always liable for those decisions.
The big exception is harassment because harassment, particularly sexual harassment, is never part of someone's job duties. So in harassment cases, the individual harasser is liable but the employer may not be unless they knew what was going on and didn't do anything about it.
It's confusing and makes your head hurt. And that's just federal discrimination law. Other employment laws, both state and federal, deal with agent liability differently.
Now, let's move to the Workday lawsuit. In that case, the plaintiff is claiming that Workday was an agent of the employer, but not in the sense of someone the employer was directing. They are claiming that Workday has independent liability as an employer too because they were acting like an employer in screening and rejecting applicants for the employer.
But that's kinda the whole point of HR Technology—to save the employer time and resources by doing some of the work. The software doesn't replace the employer's decision making and the employer is going to be liable for any discrimination regardless of whether and how the employer used their software.
If this were a products liability case, the answer would turn on how the product was designed to be used and how the employer used it. But this is an employment law and discrimination case. So, the legal question here is whether a company that makes HR Technology can also be directly liable for discriminatory outcomes when the employer uses that technology.
We don't have an answer to that yet and won't for a while. That's because this case is just at the pleading stage and hasn't been decided based on the evidence. What's happened so far is Workday filed a motion to dismiss based on the allegations in the complaint. Basically, Workday said, "Hey, we're just a software company. We don't make employment decisions; the employer does. It's the employer who is responsible for using our software in a way that doesn't discriminate. So, please let us out of the case. Then the plaintiff and EEOC said it's too soon to decide that. If all of the allegations in the lawsuit are considered true, then the plaintiff has made viable legal claims against Workday.
Those claims are that Workday's screening function acts like the employer in evaluating applications and rejecting or accepting them for the next level of review. This is similar to what third party recruiters and other employment agencies do and those folks are generally liable for those decisions under discrimination law. In addition, Workday could even be an agent of the employer if the employer has directly delegated that screening function to the software.
We're not to the question of whether a software company is really an agent of the employer or is even acting like an employment agency. And even if it is, whether it's the kind of agency that has direct liability or whether it's just the employer who ends up liable. This will all depend on statutory definitions and actual evidence about how the software is designed, how it works, and how the employer used it.
We also aren't at the point where we look at the contracts between the employer and Workday, how liability is allocated, whether there are indemnity clauses, and whether these type of contractual defenses even apply if Workday meets the statutory definition of an employer or agent who can be liable under Title VII.
Causation will also be a big issue because how the employer sets up the software, it's level of supervision of what happens with the software, and what's really going on in the screening process will all be extremely important.
The only thing that's been decided so far is that the plaintiff filed a viable claim against Workday and the lawsuit can proceed. Here are the details of the case and some good general advice for employers using HR Technology in any employment decision making process.
- Heather Bussing
AI Workplace Screener Faces Bias Lawsuit: 5 Lessons for Employers and 5 Lessons for AI Developers
by Anne Yarovoy Khan, John Polson, and Erica Wilson
at Fisher Phillips
A California federal court just allowed a frustrated job applicant to proceed with an employment discrimination lawsuit against an AI-based vendor after more than 100 employers that use the vendor’s screening tools rejected him. The judge’s July 12 decision allows the class action against Workday to continue based on employment decisions made by Workday’s customers on the theory that Workday served as an “agent” for all of the employers that rejected him and that its algorithmic screening tools were biased against his race, age, and disability status. The lawsuit can teach valuable lessons to employers and AI developers alike. What are five things that employers can learn from this case, and what are five things that AI developers need to know?
AI Job Screening Tool Leads to 100+ Rejections
Here is a quick rundown of the allegations contained in the complaint. It’s important to remember that this case is in the very earliest stages of litigation, and Workday has not yet even provided a direct response to the allegations – so take these points with a grain of salt and recognize that they may even be proven false.
Derek Mobley is a Black man over the age of 40 who self-identifies as having anxiety and depression. He has a degree in finance from Morehouse College and extensive experience in various financial, IT help-desk, and customer service positions.
Between 2017 and 2024, Mobley applied to more than 100 jobs with companies that use Workday’s AI-based hiring tools – and says he was rejected every single time. He would see a job posting on a third-party website (like LinkedIn), click on the job link, and be redirected to the Workday platform.
Thousands of companies use Workday’s AI-based applicant screening tools, which include personality and cognitive tests. They then interpret a candidate’s qualifications through advanced algorithmic methods and can automatically reject them or advance them along the hiring process.
Mobley alleges the AI systems reflect illegal biases and rely on biased training data. He notes the fact that his race could be identified because he graduated from a historically Black college, his age could be determined by his graduation year, and his mental disabilities could be revealed through the personality tests.
He filed a federal lawsuit against Workday alleging race discrimination under Title VII and Section 1981, age discrimination under the ADEA, and disability discrimination under the ADA.
But he didn’t file just any type of lawsuit. He filed a class action claim, seeking to represent all applicants like him who weren’t hired because of the alleged discriminatory screening process.
Workday asked the court to dismiss the claim on the basis that it was not the employer making the employment decision regarding Mobley, but after over a year of procedural wrangling, the judge gave the green light for Mobley to continue his lawsuit.
Judge Gives Green Light to Discrimination Claim Against AI Developer
Direct Participation in Hiring Process is Key – The judge’s July 12 order says that Workday could potentially be held liable as an “agent” of the employers who rejected Mobley. The employers allegedly delegated traditional hiring functions – including automatically rejecting certain applicants at the screening stage – to Workday’s AI-based algorithmic decision-making tools. That means that Workday’s AI product directly participated in the hiring process.
Middle-of-the-Night Email is Critical – One of the allegations Mobley raises to support his claim that Workday’s AI decision-making tool automatically rejected him was an application he submitted to a particular company at 12:55 a.m. He received a rejection email less than an hour later at 1:50 a.m., making it appear unlikely that human oversight was involved.
“Disparate Impact” Theory Can Be Advanced – Once the judge decided that Workday could be a proper defendant as an agent, she then allowed Mobley to proceed against Workday on a “disparate impact” theory. That means the company didn’t necessarily intend to screen out Mobley based on race, age, or disability, but that it could have set up selection criteria that had the effect of screening out applicants based on those protected criteria. In fact, in one instance, Mobley was rejected for a job at a company where he was currently working on a contract basis doing very similar work.
Not All Software Developers On the Hook – This decision doesn’t mean that all software vendors and AI developers could qualify as “agents” subject to a lawsuit. Take, for example, a vendor that develops a spreadsheet system that simply helps employers sort through applicants. That vendor shouldn’t be part of any later discrimination lawsuit, the court said, even if the employer later uses that system to purposefully sort the candidates by age and rejects all those over 40 years old.
5 Tips for Employers
This lawsuit could have just easily been filed against any of the 100+ employers that rejected Mobley, and they still may be added as parties or sued in separate actions. That is a stark reminder that employers need to tread carefully when implementing AI hiring solutions through third parties. A few tips:
Vet Your Vendors – Ensure your AI vendors follow ethical guidelines and have measures in place to prevent bias before you deploy the tool. This includes understanding the data they use to train their models and the algorithms they employ. Regular audits and evaluations of the AI systems can help identify and mitigate potential biases – but it all starts with asking the right questions at the outset of the relationship and along the way.
Work with Counsel on Indemnification Language – It’s not uncommon for contracts between business partners to include language shifting the cost of litigation and resulting damages from employer to vendor. But make sure you work with counsel when developing such language in these instances. Public policy doesn’t often allow you to transfer the cost of discriminatory behavior to someone else. You may want to place limits on any such indemnity as well, like certain dollar amounts or several months of accrued damages. And you’ll want to make sure that your agreements contain specific guidance on what type of vendor behavior falls under whatever agreement you reach.
Consider Legal Options – Should you be targeted in a discrimination action, consider whether you can take action beyond indemnification when it comes to your AI vendors. Breach of contract claims, deceptive business practice lawsuits, or other formal legal actions to draw the third party into the litigation could work to shield you from shouldering the full responsibility.
Implement Ongoing Monitoring – Regularly monitor the outcomes of your AI hiring tools. This includes tracking the demographic data of applicants and hires to identify any patterns that may suggest bias or have a potential disparate impact. This proactive approach can help you catch and address issues before they become legal problems.
Add the Human Touch – Consider where you will insert human decision-making at critical spots along your hiring process to prevent AI bias, or the appearance of bias. While an automated process that simply screens check-the-box requirements such as necessary licenses, years of experience, educational degrees, and similar objective criteria is low risk, completely replacing human judgment when it comes to making subjective decisions stands at the peak of riskiness when it comes to the use of AI. And make sure you train your HR staff and managers on the proper use of AI when it comes to making hiring or employment-related decisions.
5 Tips for Vendors
While not a complete surprise given all the talk from regulators and others in government regarding concerns with bias in automated decision making tools, this lawsuit should grab the attention of any developer of AI-based hiring tools. When taken in conjunction with the recent ACLU action against Aon Consulting for its use of AI screening platforms, it seems the time for government expressing concerns has been replaced with action. While plaintiffs’ attorneys and government enforcement officials have typically focused on employers when it comes to alleged algorithmic bias, it was only a matter of time before they turned their attention to the developers of these products. Here are some practical steps AI vendors can take now to deal with the threat.
Commit to Trustworthy AI – Make sure the design and delivery of your AI solutions are both responsible and transparent. This includes reviewing marketing and product materials.
Review Your Work – Engage in a risk-based review process throughout your product’s lifecycle. This will help mitigate any unintended consequences.
Team With Your Lawyers – Work hand-in-hand with counsel to help ensure compliance with best practices and all relevant workplace laws – and not just law prohibiting intentional discrimination, but also those barring the unintentional “disparate impact” claims as we see in the Workday lawsuit.
Develop Bias Detection Mechanisms – Implement robust testing and validation processes to detect and eliminate bias in your AI systems. This includes using diverse training data and regularly updating your algorithms to address any identified biases.
Lean Into Outside Assistance – Meanwhile, collaborate with external auditors or third-party reviewers to ensure impartiality in your bias detection efforts.
原文来自：https://www.salary.com/newsletters/law-review/agency-law-and-the-workday-lawsuit/
头条
2024年08月10日
头条
David Green: The best HR & People Analytics articles of July 2024这个月的《数据驱动HR月报》由Insight222发布了他们的新研究报告《构建人力分析生态系统：运营模式2.0》。在Insight222庆祝成立七周年之际，团队成员们齐聚一堂，共同回顾过去的成就，规划未来的步骤，并庆祝这一成功。此外，本月的重点还包括我有幸在由Mercer组织的LinkedIn直播中担任主持人，主题是“AI时代的技能驱动组织”，并欢迎在上个月加入的2000多名《数据驱动HR月报》新订阅者。本期由Visier赞助。
在案例研究部分，展示了Experian如何通过Visier将报告时间减少了70%。Experian的数据分析团队曾在Excel和Oracle OBI-EE套件中花费大量时间，限制了战略工作。Visier帮助他们显著提高了效率，使其团队能够专注于发掘劳动力洞察力、赋能数据驱动决策，并建立数据驱动的HR文化。
此外，本期还讨论了SHRM在其DEI（多样性、公平与包容性）计划中移除“公平”一词的决定。这一决定在DEI受到持续攻击、许多知名公司撤回DEI承诺的背景下显得尤为令人震惊。一些评论认为，SHRM此举的动机可能是政治性的，而非其所声明的“通过强调首先包容性，旨在解决DE&I项目的当前不足，减少社会反弹和极化”。
I’m just about to go out on vacation in the South of France for three weeks (hurrah!) and with growing evidence that taking a vacation improves physical and mental wellbeing, I’m looking forward to having time to relax, reflect and recharge. Before I go, I’m looking forward to the release this week of our new Insight222 research study: Building the People Analytics Ecosystem: Operating Model v 2.0 (click on the link to register to receive a copy).
Other highlights in July included:
We marked our seventh anniversary at Insight222 by gathering the team together for a whole week to reflect on our achievements, plan the next steps and celebrate our success.
I had the honour of moderating a LinkedIn Live on Skills-Powered Organisations in the Age of AI, organised by Mercer, with Ravin Jesuthasan, CFA, FRSA and Tanuj Kapilashrami. You can watch the recording here.
Welcome to the more than 2000 new subscribers to the Data Driven HR Monthly newsletter, who joined in the last month.
This edition of the Data Driven HR Monthly is sponsored by our friends at Visier
CASE STUDY: How Experian Cut Reporting Time by 70%
Struggling with manual reporting? Experian, a data analytics giant, did too. Their people analytics team spent hours in Excel and Oracle OBI-EE suite limiting strategic work. Visier slashed their reporting time by 70%. Read the case study.
Now, their People Analytics team focuses on:
Uncovering workforce insights
Empowering data-driven decisions
Building a data-driven HR culture
Visier empowers our people to leverage data for better decisions
Ready to unlock your people data's power? Read the case study.
Visier Inc.: Make data-driven HR decisions. Easier. Faster. On-Demand. At Scale.
To sponsor an edition of the Data Driven HR Monthly, and share your brand with more than 130,000 Data Driven HR Monthly subscribers, send an email to dgreen@zandel.org.
SHRM and the war on DEI
I’m not here to beat up on SHRM, but their flabbergasting decision to drop ‘Equity’ from its approach to ‘Inclusion, Equity and Diversity’ seems to have achieved the notable feat of being universally unpopular. To take this decision at a time when DEI is under sustained attack from politicians and when a growing number of prominent companies are backtracking from previous DEI commitments seems peculiar to say the least. It has led some commentators to conclude that SHRM’s surprise move is politically motivated rather than being driven by their stated objective, which SHRM explained as: “By emphasizing Inclusion-first, we aim to address the current shortcomings of DE&I programs, which have led to societal backlash and increasing polarization.” Whatever SHRM’s motive if, as likely, this decision by such an influential body undermines DEI then it is not only unhelpful but bad for employees, bad for organisations, and bad for society. As Shujaat Ahmad writes in his coruscating analysis:
Equity is one of the most clear, tangible measures for culture change on systemic discrimination. Without it, DEIB is lost in a maze of good intentions and half-baked commitments.
Share the love!
Enjoy reading the collection of resources for July and, if you do, please share some data driven HR love with your colleagues and networks. Thanks to the many of you who liked, shared and/or commented on June’s compendium.
If you enjoy a weekly dose of curated learning (and the Digital HR Leaders podcast), the Insight222 newsletter: Digital HR Leaders is published every Tuesday - subscribe here.
NEW: Insight222 research report on the People Analytics Ecosystem
Access the new Insight222 study here: Building the People Analytics Ecosystem: Operating Model v 2.0 - or by clicking on the image below.
HYBRID, GENERATIVE AI AND THE FUTURE OF WORK
JENS BAIER ET AL - How Work Preferences Are Shifting in the Age of GenAI
When it comes to GenAI’s impact on jobs, talent is aware but unafraid. Although only 5% think that GenAI will replace their jobs, 60% anticipate that they will need to reskill significantly. Most say that they will need help to understand what skills to build.
For the first time since its inception a decade ago, BCG’s Decoding Global Talent study finds that job security is ranked by workers as their number one work preference (see FIG 1). Analysis revealed that workers who expressed concern about the impact of GenAI on their jobs were more likely to prioritise job security. They also recognise the importance of learning, with 60% of workers anticipating they will need to reskill significantly. As the study highlights, to attract and retain talent, organisations will need to solve a complex puzzle. They must anticipate the impact of technology on their workforce and offer robust reskilling programs to help employees stay competitive. (Authors: Jens Stefan Baier Orsolya Kovacs-Ondrejkovic Dr. Tobias Zimmermann Pierre Antebi Dr. Susan Gritzka Sacha Knorr Vinciane Beauchene Carmen Márquez Castro Zoë McFarlane Anja Bates Niharika Jajoria Julie Bedard and Ashish Garg).
FIG 1: What workers value most in a job, 2014-2023 (Source: BCG)
NICOLE SCOBLE-WILLIAMS ET AL - Generative AI and the future of work: Boundless Potential
It’s ‘humans with machines’ and not humans or machines that will transcend leading organizations.
An insightful and comprehensive report by the Deloitte AI Institute on the seismic impact of generative AI on the future of work. The report is structured into three chapters each designed to answer a key question. (1) What is generative AI and how is it being used? (2) What is generative AI’s likely impact on jobs? (3) What are the strategies to prepare organisations for change? There are a ton of insights, case studies and frameworks to learn from. Three that resonated especially with me were: (1) The explanation of the difference between work, jobs, tasks and skills (see FIG 2). (2) Guidance for organisations on how to break down jobs in the generative AI era. (3) The five-step framework for adopting a researcher’s mindset for human-generative SI integration: a) hypothesis formation, b) data collection and analysis, c) broad organisational experimentation, d) iterative testing and feedback, and e) strategy refinement. Authors: Nicole Scoble-Williams GAICD Diane Sinti Jodi Baker Calamai Björn Bringmann Laura Shact Greg Vert Tara Murphy and Susan Cantrell)
FIG 2: Work vs Jobs vs Tasks vs Skills (Source: Deloitte)
JUSTIN SHEMELEY, ANDREW ELSTON, AND JASDEEP KAREER - Transforming HR and People Analytics with AI
AI helps us reclaim capacity for more complex workforce strategy questions. It enables us to identify internal mobility opportunities and conduct scenario planning and hypothesis testing.
In their article, Justin Shemeley Andrew Elston and Jasdeep Kareer, PhD (née Bhambra), summarise some of the key takeaways from the recent Insight222 webinar I moderated on how AI is transforming HR and people analytics. The topics covered include: (1) The current landscape of AI in HR. (2) Short- and long-term impacts on the HR operating model. (3) AI’s role in workforce planning and development. (4) Essential Skills for Leveraging AI in HR. (5) How to build a strong foundation for AI adoption. The article also provides the answers to the questions posed by those that attended the webinar. You can access the entire webinar recording here: Transforming HR and People Analytics with AI.
FIG 3: Demystifying AI in HR and People Analytics (Source: Insight222)
RAVIN JESUTHASAN - Achieving the productivity promise of generative AI requires redesigning work
When he coined The Productivity Paradox, Robert Solow outlined two fundamental reasons why new technologies often don’t deliver on their promise. First, early versions of technologies are often flawed and unsuitable for widespread adoption – this applies less to GenAI. In his thoughtful article, Ravin Jesuthasan, CFA, FRSA tackles Solow’s second reason, which relates to the architecture of work. He outlines that to address this issue, organisations need to undertake systemic work redesign through deconstructing the work, redeploying tasks and creating new ways of working. Ravin cites the six-step framework (see FIG 4) he advanced together with John Boudreau in their book, Reinventing Jobs, and describes the potential productivity gains arising as a result.
FIG 4: Achieving the optimal combinations of humans, automation and AI (Source: Jesuthasan and Boudreau)
PEOPLE ANALYTICS
DELOITTE - 2023 High-Impact People Analytics Research
Prioritizing PA customers means understanding their needs—and how those needs align (or don’t) with the function’s capabilities and broader business priorities.
A new report by Eric Lesser Peter DeBellis and Marc Solow based on a 2023 study by Deloitte of more than 400 organisations across 18 countries presents a People Analytics Maturity Model (see FIG 5) and discusses six key findings. These are: (1) People Analytics has become an organisational imperative. (2) Data culture is the single biggest predictor of people analytics performance. (3) Tech investments mean nothing without human capability (and vice versa). (4) Today’s challenges demand more data from more sources. (5) An expanding customer base means new demands on the people analytics function. (6) People data is business data – treat it as such.
FIG 5: High-Impact People Analytics Maturity Model (Source: Deloitte)
CATHERINE COPPINGER - 4 New Ways to Model Work
With the rise of distributed work, managers are being asked to work in a fundamentally different way than they’ve worked before
In her article, Catherine Coppinger of Worklytics, discusses four new ways to model how work gets done – and how it could be done better: (1) Workday Intensity – see FIG 6 - (“We measure intensity as time spent on digital work as a % of overall workday span”). (2) Work-Life Balance. (3) Manager Effectiveness (“With the rise of distributed work, managers are being asked to work in a fundamentally different way than they’ve worked before”). (4) Sales Effectiveness (“With sales stalling, People Analytics teams are increasingly being asked to weigh in on what can be done to reaccelerate revenue growth”). For more insights on the manager effectiveness topic, listen to Catherine on a recent episode of the Digital HR Leaders podcast: How to Use Passive Data to Enhance Manager Effectiveness.
FIG 6: Workplace Intensity: How do remote and in-office days compare (Source: Worklytics)
PREETHIKA SAINAM, SEIGYOUNG AUH, RICHARD ETTENSON, AND BULENT MENGUC - The High Cost of Misaligned Business and Analytics Goals
It is not only the level of analytics that matters, but also how aligned analytics capabilities are with business goals.
What does success in analytics really mean and how should companies measure it? This was the mission of a study by Preethika Sainam Seigyoung Auh Richard Ettenson PhD and Bulent Menguc. While they found that creating a data-driven culture, adopting advanced analytics capabilities, and employing a well-developed data strategy were all important, the key ingredient is the degree of alignment between business goals and analytics capabilities. Their article presents findings from the study, the differences between misaligned and aligned companies, the cost of misalignment (see FIG 7) and how to measure alignment in seven areas: (1) Culture, (2) Alignment with strategy, (3) Leadership commitment, (4) Operations and structure, (5) Employee empowerment, (6) Proactive market orientation, and (7) Skills and competencies.
FIG 7: The Cost of Misalignment (Source: Sainam et al)
ANDRÉS GARCÍA AYALA - People analytics at the heart of AI’s successful workplace adoption | LEA MIKUS – Five Steps to Kick-Start People Analytics | WILLIS JENSEN - What Makes a Good People Analytics Metric? | RAJA SENGUPTA – 1000 Generative AI Prompts for HR | GUILLAUME LHOTE - The Role of Talent Intelligence in Pharma
In recent editions of the Data Driven HR Monthly, I’ve featured a collection of articles by current and recent people analytics leaders. These act as a spur and inspiration to the field. Five are highlighted here. (1) In his compelling article, Andrés García Ayala, Group Head of People Analytics and Strategic Workforce Planning at Legal & General, discusses five reasons why People Analytics needs to be at the heart of AI’s successful adoption and implementation in the workplace. (2) In a LinkedIn post, Lea Mikus unveils five recommendations to kick-start people analytics in your organisation including getting started by focusing on answering one strategic business question through your people data. (3) In an edition of his excellent Making People Analytics Real Substack, Willis Jensen digs into what makes a ‘good’ and a ‘bad’ people analytics metric (see FIG 8). The secret? Ask yourself: “Can I make a line chart of the metric?” (4) Raja Sengupta provides an invaluable resource for HR and people analytics professionals in a 130 page booklet comprising 1,000 AI prompts for HR across ten HR topics. (5) Guillaume Lhote, Talent Intelligence Lead at Takeda, details the critical role of talent intelligence in the pharmaceutical industry – thanks to Toby Culshaw for highlighting this resource.
FIG 8: Examples of HR metrics (Source: Willis Jensen)
THE EVOLUTION OF HR, LEARNING, AND DATA DRIVEN CULTURE
DAVE ULRICH - Update on HR Business Partner Model Continuing Evolution and Relevance
In the last seven years, HR’s contribution to the business has evolved and is increasing. The HR contribution comes from individual HR professionals who have the competencies to fully engage in business conversations. The HR contribution also comes from HR functions, practices, and analytics increasing stakeholder value.
There’s no one better informed to comment on the evolution of the HR business partner (HRBP) model than Dave Ulrich, given he coined and popularised the model in his seminal 1997 book, Human Resource Champions. In his article, Dave details nine evolutions that are combining to reshape and elevate the future role of the HRBP including these five: (1) People and organisation concerns have evolved to be more central to business success. (2) Talent has evolved to pay increased attention on worktask and meaning (see FIG 9). (3) Leadership has evolved to front-line leaders and emerging competencies. (4) HR delivery has evolved to AI–enabled HR (5) HR analytics has evolved from benchmarking to guidance.
FIG 9: From ‘Workforce’ to ‘Worktask’ (Source: Dave Ulrich)
SERENA HUANG - AI in HR: Missing the Forest for the Trees
By focusing on strategic workforce planning, responsible and ethical AI, and clear ownership for AI adoption, HR can become the strategic AI champion the organization needs.
In her From Data to Action LinkedIn newsletter, Serena H. Huang, Ph.D. bemoans the narrow focus of much of the discussion about AI in HR on automation and cost efficiency. Instead, Serena urges a bolder approach, presenting three ‘big-picture issues’ centred on organisational readiness that HR should focus on: (1) Strategic Workforce Planning (e.g. LinkedIn recently estimates that 55% of jobs will be augmented or disrupted by GenAI – see FIG 10). (2) Responsible and Ethical AI. (3) Clear Ownership: Who is Driving the AI Train? Thanks to Serena for highlighting the recent Digital HR Leaders podcast episode with IBM CHRO Nickle LaMoreaux in her article, where Nickle expanded on IBM’s Responsible AI policy and how this is applied to HR. You can listen to the whole episode here: How IBM Uses AI to Transform its HR Strategies.
FIG 10: GAI’s expected effect on LinkedIn members’ skills globally (Source: LinkedIn Economic Graph Research Institute)
CHIEF ETHERIDGE – 3 Strategies to Position HR for Innovation
Only 28% of HR employees agree that their HR function encourages them to take risks, even if they result in failure. This risk aversion is a major obstacle to innovation.
As the preface for this paper by Chief Etheridge for Gartner states, HR is under pressure to develop innovative solutions for a unique set of organisational challenges such as incorporating new ways of working, establishing digital workplaces, and leveraging artificial intelligence. The paper outlines three strategies HR can implement: (1) Define Innovation’s Value and Benefits to HR. (2) Embed Innovation Networks in HR (see FIG 11 for example from Toyota). (3) Establish Structured Innovation Process for HR (with an example from Fannie Mae).
FIG 11: How Toyota directly infuses HR with expertise and skills (Source: Gartner, adapted from Toyota)
WORKFORCE PLANNING, ORG DESIGN AND SKILLS
MCKINSEY - Help wanted: Charting the challenge of tight labour markets in advanced economies
Companies and economies will need to boost productivity and find new ways to expand the workforce
A comprehensive study by McKinsey on how labour markets in the G8 countries are among the tightest in two decades and are set to get worse as workforce continue to age. The study is packed full of insights, visualisations and charts and is a must-read for anyone involved in workforce planning, recruiting, talent intelligence and people analytics. Four actions are recommended for companies and policy makers: (1) Focus on skilling and reskilling, including attracting talent from unconventional pools, offering more flexible work, and internal mobility. (2) Encourage foreign-born workers with programs to properly integrate them into the workforce (one to note given the hysteria about immigration in all of the eight countries in the study). (3) Shape retirement policies to encourage people to work beyond standard retirement ages and take steps to attract more women into the workforce. (4) Prioritise investment in AI and automation to unlock productivity. (Authors: Anu Madgavkar Olivia White Sven Smit Chris Bradley Ryan Luby and Michael Neary).
FIG 12: 4 scenarios for GDP growth 2023-30 (Source: McKinsey)
JORGE TAMAYO, LEILA DOUMI, SAGAR GOEL, ORSOLYA KOVÁCS-ONDREJKOVIC, AND RAFFAELLA SADUN - Designing a Successful Reskilling Program
In today’s fast-changing work landscape, the ability to reskill will become increasingly vital to staying competitive.
In this article, written as a follow up to their award-winning “Reskilling in the Age of AI”, Jorge Tamayo Leila Doumi Sagar Goel Orsolya Kovacs-Ondrejkovic and Raffaella Sadunshare the results of a reskilling survey that they conducted with chief human resources officers and business leaders, and discuss six paradigms on reskilling. These are: (1) Reskilling is a strategic imperative. (2) Reskilling is the responsibility of every leader and manager. (3) Reskilling is a change management initiative. (4) Employees want to reskill – if programs are attractive. (5) Reskilling takes a village. (6) To reskill successfully, you need to be able to analyse and measure the benefit of your interventions and investments.
SKILLS-BASED ORGANISATIONS SPECIAL
ALLIE NAWRAT - Standard Chartered: ‘The people agenda is a strong enabler of the performance of the bank’ | ALLAN SCHWEYER, BARBARA LOMBARDO, MATT ROSENBAUM, AND PETER SHEPPARD - The Long but Rewarding Journey to Becoming a Skills-Driven Organization | JOSH BERSIN - TechWolf Accelerates Corporate Skills Tech Market With $43 Million Round | MARC EFFRON - Is the Juice Worth the Squeeze? Questions About Becoming a Skills-based Organization | DELOITTE - The skills-based organization: A new operating model for work and the workforce
Following the positive reaction to the MIT/Mercer study, Strategic Shift: Skills-Powered Organizations in the Age of AI, I included in the June edition of Data Driven HR Monthly, as well as the LinkedIn Live I participated in last week with Ravin Jesuthasan and Tanuj Kapilashrami, I thought it helpful to include a ‘special’ in the July edition of Data Driven HR Monthly on skills-based organisations. Six resources are included. (1) Tanuj Kapilashrami, Chief Strategy and Talent Officer at Standard Chartered, sits down with Alexandra Nawrat of UNLEASH to outline how the shift to being a skills-first employer is enabling business outcomes at the bank. (2) The Conference Board provides a compelling case study of Ericsson’s journey to becoming a skills-based organisation, which has seen skills become the language of the employee experience at the company (see FIG 13) – authors: Allan Schweyer Barbara Lombardo Matt Rosenbaum and Peter Sheppard. (3) Josh Bersin takes his cue from the latest round of investment in TechWolf plus the acquisition of SkyHive by Cornerstone by Cornerstone OnDemand to provide an overview of the burgeoning skills technology market as it moves from ‘pioneer stage’ to ‘early maturity’ (see FIG 14). (4) Marc Effron details 17 considerations for companies seeking to embark on the journey to becoming a skills-based organisation. (5) The Deloitte team of Susan Cantrell Michael Griffiths Robin Jones and Julie Hiipakka present their seminal operating model for a skills-based organisation (see FIG 15).
FIG 13: Skills are the language of the employee experience at Ericsson (Source: Ericsson)
FIG 14: Source – Josh Bersin
FIG 15: The skills-based organization: A new model for work and workforce (Source: Deloitte)
EMPLOYEE LISTENING, EMPLOYEE EXPERIENCE, AND EMPLOYEE WELLBEING
DERRICK P. BRANSBY, MICHAELA J. KERRISSEY, AND AMY C. EDMONDSON - New Hires’ Psychological Safety Erodes Quickly
Psychological safety is not the default in any workplace, and those who need it most — newcomers — are also most vulnerable to losing it.
Research finds that psychological safety is especially important for new hires as it enables them to overcome the challenge of admitting fallibility, tackle a steep learning curve and embrace new perspectives. So, it is concerning that in their new study, Amy Edmondson Derrick Bransby and Michaela Kerrissey identify a fascinating pattern: On average, newcomers joined their organisation with higher psychological safety relative to their more tenured colleagues, then lost it and waited years to reach levels comparable to when they arrived. Nevertheless, the study also found that departments with high psychological safety among colleagues help reduce that decline and facilitate quick recovery for new hires (see FIG 16). The article also discusses why newcomers are vulnerable to losing psychological safety and presents strategies to help preserve their early willingness to speak up.
FIG 16: Contrast between employees in departments with high and low psychological safety (Source: Bransby et al)
CHRISTINA BRADLEY, LINDY GREER, AND JEFFREY SANCHEZ-BURKS - When Your Employee Feels Angry, Sad, or Dejected
Leaders must be able to respond in a supportive manner to the emotions of their employees. That requires them to learn how to handle others’ feelings in different contexts, be more aware of their own behavior, and hone their skills. If they can master those three things, the result will be a healthier, more successful organization.
In their article for Harvard Business Review, three researchers from Michigan’s Ross School of Business provide a roadmap to leaders for providing employees with emotional support. As Christina Bradley Lindy Greer and Jeffrey Sanchez-Burks outline, the right response depends heavily on context, in particular, whether someone (1) is working on a time‑sensitive goal and (2) seems to be coping (see FIG 17).
FIG 17: Figuring out how to respond to an employee’s emotions (Source: Bradley et al)
LEADERSHIP AND CULTURE
MICHAEL ARENA, ANDRAS VICSEK, JOHN GOLDEN, AND SCOTT HINES – Cultivating Culture in a Hybrid Context
Because connections are more fragile in hybrid workplaces, it is increasingly important that managers understand the network dynamics of company culture.
Many companies are concerned about the impact of remote and hybrid work on their culture. In their article, Michael Arena Andras Vicsek John Golden, Ph.D. and Scott Hines, PhD, explore how cultural behaviours form and spread across organisations in three work modes: a physical environment, a remote environment, and a hybrid model. They find that prominent cultural behaviours tend to cluster in discernible patterns in each of these modes. The article discusses ways – and provides examples – on how to restore bridges between teams, harness influencers to facilitate change, engage exemplars to model desired behaviours, and reengage the hearts and minds of employees, to improve collaboration, wellbeing and outcomes. One example in the article describes how a large consumer products company launched a series of in-person events to restore bridging connections between their teams in parallel with a reengagement strategy to rebuild their employees’ sense of owning the company’s purpose. This enabled the company to increase connections by 37 percent and positive energy by 20 percent.
FIG 18: Shift of Positive Energy across Work Modes (Source: Arena et al)
DANIEL STILLMAN - The Four Quadrants of Employee Performance
In his essay, Daniel Stillman distils Shake Shack head honcho Danny Meyer’s Four Quadrants of Employee Performance to help explain how to harness the hiring, retention and development of talent to scale company culture intentionally. The four quadrants (see FIG 19) are: (1) Can and Will (“water these flowers”). (2) Can’t and Will (“coach them”). (3) Can’t and Won’t (“put the candle underneath their rear end”). (4) Can and Won’t (“The hardest one…”). For more from Danny Meyer, I recommend watching him in conversation with Adam Grant at the recent Wharton People Analytics Conference, where they discussed: The Hidden Potential of Frontline Workers.
FIG 19: The Four Quadrants of Employee Performance (Adapted by Daniel Stillman from Danny Meyer)
DIVERSITY, EQUITY, INCLUSION, AND BELONGING
ROUVEN KANITZ, MAX REINWALD, KATERINA GONZALEZ, ANNE BURMEISTER, YIFAN SONG, AND MARTIN HOEGL - 4 Ways Employees Respond to DEI Initiatives
In their article for Harvard Business Review, Rouven Kanitz Max Reinwald Katerina Gonzalez Anne Burmeister Yifan Song and Prof. Dr. Martin Hoegl present their research, which finds that employees respond to DEI initiatives in four ways (see FIG 20): excited supporters, calm compliers, torn shapers, and discontented opponents. The article outlines each of the four profiles, and provides guidance to managers on how they can use the typology to segment their employees, effectively understand the range of responses, and tailor specific interventions to address them.
FIG 20: The 4 Ways Employees Respond to DEI Initiatives (Source: Kanitz et al)
HR TECH VOICES
Much of the innovation in the field continues to be driven by the vendor community, and I’ve picked out a few resources from July that I recommend readers delve into:
RYAN WONG - With AI, HR Faces A Choice: Get Onboard Or Risk Getting Left Behind – Ryan Wong, CEO of Visier Inc., provides a compelling set of reasons why HR needs to embrace AI: (1) It helps source talent, faster. (2) It frees up HR to focus on strategic HR. (3) It unlocks people insights that drive the business.
BEN WIGERT - The Strengths, Weaknesses and Blind Spots of Managers – Ben Wigert, Ph.D, MBA unveils the findings of a Gallup study to compare how managers think they are currently leading their team versus how employees say they are being managed (see FIG 21). Thanks to Hung Lee for highlighting in his Recruiting Brainfood newsletter.
FIG 21: Current State of Management: Employee vs. Manager Perspectives (Source: Gallup)
FRANCISCO MARIN - Unlocking the Power of Centrality Metrics in Organizational Network Analysis – Francisco Marin of Cognitive Talent Solutions breaks down centrality metrics, and how they can be leveraged to make ONA more actionable and impactful.
CULTURE AMP - HR’s complete performance management guide – A hugely comprehensive Culture Amp guide on the what, the why, and the how of performance management. Thanks to Jodie Evans for highlighting.
FIG 22: The building blocks of performance management (Source: Culture Amp)
JOSEPH IFIEGBU - How do you ensure ethical practices in the implementation of People Analytics in your organization? – An insightful post – and meme (see FIG 23) – by Joseph Ifiegbu, CEO at eqtble, on people analytics, trust and ethics.
FIG 23: Source – Joseph Ifiegbu
PODCASTS OF THE MONTH
In another month of high-quality podcasts, I’ve selected five gems for your aural pleasure: (you can also check out the latest episodes of the Digital HR Leaders Podcast – see ‘From My Desk’ below):
DAVE ULRICH, BOB EICHINGER, AND ALLAN CHURCH – The Science of Talent Management – In an episode of the Future of HR podcast, Dave Ulrich, Bob Eichinger and Allan Church, Ph.D. join host JP Elliott, PhD to discuss the ‘knowing-doing’ gap in talent management, and why skills-based organisations are an incomplete method of talent management.
AARON DE SMET AND BROOKE WEDDLE - Gen AI talent: Your next flight risk - On an episode of The McKinsey Podcast, Aaron De Smet and Brooke Weddle talk to Lucia Rahilly about what workers who regularly use GenAI want most, as well as practical steps leaders can take now to keep them happy and engaged.
KIM SCOTT - Radical Respect in Polarized Times: Strategies for Leaders – Kim Scott, author of Radical Candor joins Lars Schmidt in an episode of Redefining Work to discuss the workplace application of ‘Radical Candor’, and the genesis of her latest work and book – Radical Respect, intended as a precursor to her initial book.
BRADFORD WILLIAMS - How People Analytics Can Transform or Destroy Your Workplace - Bradford Williams, Head of People Analytics at Northwestern Mutual, joins Christopher Rainey on the HR Leaders podcast to explore the pivotal role of managers in shaping culture, the impact of technology on HR, the significance of strong organisational networks, and the role of people analytics in enhancing business outcomes.
RICHARD ROSENOW - People Data Supply Chain, One Model, and The Power of No – Richard Rosenow joins hosts Cole Napper and Scott Hines, PhD on Directionally Correct to discuss the people data supply chain and its impact on people analytics.
VIDEO OF THE MONTH
TIM PEFFERS – How to measure productivity
For those of you who haven’t consumed Random Walks in HR, along with Heather Whiteman, Ph.D., Tim Peffers produces the best video blogs in the people analytics field. In this video, Tim builds on his premise that “people analytics will never deliver on its promise without being able to measure individual productivity”, by presenting his proposal to develop a new metric – Productivity Against Replacement (PAR), which as Tim explains is inspired by Bill James’ WAR (Wins Above Replacement) metric.
BOOK OF THE MONTH
MARTIN R. EDWARDS, KIRSTEN EDWARDS, AND DAISUNG JANG – Predictive HR Analytics: Mastering the HR Metric
Having a third edition of a book published is an impressive achievement – and testament to the quality of material. In this third edition of Predictive HR Analytics, Martin Edwards, Kirsten Edwards, and Daisung Jang provide a clear, practical and accessible framework for understanding people data, flourishing with people analytics, and using advanced statistical techniques. Predictive HR Analytics has been adopted by more than 20 universities across the world as a core or recommended text in HR and business analytics courses, and it’s clear to see why.
FROM MY DESK
July saw the first four episodes of series 40 of the Digital HR Leaders podcast, which is kindly being sponsored by our friends at HiBob – thanks to Louis Gordon. Additionally, July also saw the publication of a new article in Workday’s Smart CHRO magazine.
PATRICK EVENDEN - How people data empowers today’s CHRO – Writing for Workday’s Smart CHRO magazine, Patrick Evenden draws on my presentation from Workday Rising, where I discussed the need for CHROs to leverage people data and bolster their HR teams’ data literacy. Thanks to Sophie Barnes.
JOHN WINSOR - Addressing the Global Skills Shortage with Open Talent Strategies – John Winsor, co-author of Open Talent and Chairman of Open Assembly, joined me to discuss the three-legged stool ‘Open Talent’ framework: internal talent marketplaces, external talent clouds, and open innovation.
MAUREEN DUNNE - HR Strategies for Embracing Neurodiverse Talent – Maureen N. Dunne, Ph.D., author of The Neurodiveristy Edge, discusses why prioritising a neurodivergent culture is essential amidst the acceleration of digital transformation.
NIRIT PELED-MUNTZ - Evolving Culture & Employee Experience in Fast-Growth Companies – HiBob’s Chief People Officer, Nirit Peled-Muntz, joins me to share HiBob’s remarkable growth journey, explaining how the culture has evolved, how the North Star of world-class employee experience has been maintained, and how the HR team has played a pivotal role in the development of HiBob’s technology platform.
HEIDI MANNA - How to Create a Flexible Work Model That Enhances Inclusion and Employee Experience – Heidi Manna, Chief People Officer at Jazz Pharmaceuticals, joins me to share details about the company’s Flexible Work Model. She discusses why the company shifted to a flexible work model and the improvements seen as a result in hiring, employee experience and inclusion.
We have a pretty strong belief that a flexible work model benefits the business and our ability to serve our patients, and it allows employees to have a better work-life integration experience as well.
LOOKING FOR A NEW ROLE IN PEOPLE ANALYTICS OR HR TECH?
I’d like to highlight once again the wonderful resource created by Richard Rosenow and the One Model team of open roles in people analytics and HR technology, which now numbers over 500 roles – and has now been developed into a LinkedIn newsletter too
THANK YOU
Olimpiusz Papiez for explaining how we can optimise our organisation's structure for greater efficiency, which was inspired by my conversation with Armand Sohet on the Digital HR Leaders podcast episode: Painting the Future of HR with AI, Analytics and Curiosity.
Huma HR for including the Digital HR Leaders podcast in their list of 10 HR Podcasts for the Summer, which also included podcasts hosted by Laurie Ruettimann, Damon Klotz and Lucy Adams.
Thomas Kohler for including the June edition of Data Driven HR Monthly in his round-up of resources for HR professionals.
Alejandra Barbarelli for recommending the June edition of Data Driven HR Monthly, and for her kind words about my content curation.
Judy Albers for summarising some of the highlights from the June edition of Data Driven HR Monthly.
Veronika Birkheim, whose post: “People analytics must be easy to use…” was inspired by the Digital HR Leaders podcast episode with Dirk Jonker: Driving Business Transformation with Advanced People Analytics
K Nair for including me in his list of 11 Influential HR Leaders, which included others that inspire me including: Laszlo Bock, Adam Grant and Josh Bersin.
Thinkers360 for including the Digital HR Leaders podcast in their List of Top Podcasts.
Anastasia Mizitova, SHRM-SCP, CPCC for her post sharing a resource from a special edition of the Insight222 Digital HR Leader newsletter: Essential Summer Reads.
Finally, a huge thank you to the following people who shared the June edition of Data Driven HR Monthly. It's much appreciated: David Balls (FCIPD) Mukesh Jain Amardeep Singh, MBA Phil Inskip Kalifa Oliver, Ph.D. Jacqui Brassey, PhD, MA, MAfN (née Schouten) Sophie Merckelbach Alison Doyle Gord Johnston MA, BHJ, BA, CHRP Asanka Gunasekara (PhD) Jayashree Shivkumar Andrews Cobbinah, MLPI, ACIHRM Henrik Håkansson Irakli Dadiani Jaqueline Oliveira-Cella Tamano Yamanaka Shay David Erin Fleming Louise Baird Bilal Laouah Jeff Wellstead Aravind Warrier Greg Newman Terri Horton, EdD, MBA, MA, SHRM-CP, PHR Susan Knolla Danielle Farrell, M.A. Alison Ettridge Adam Tombor (Wojciechowski) Roshaunda Green, MBA, CDSP, Phenom Certified Recruiter Karla Chavez Gomez Jay Polaki⚡️ SHRM-SCP/SPHR Dan Riley Emily Killham Rashleen Kaur Arora Kouros Behzad Nick Jesteadt Ken Oehler Juan Ignacio Perez Collado Jose Luis Chavez Vasquez Deviprasad Panda Swechha Mohapatra (IHRP-SP, SHRM-SCP, CIPD) Catriona Lindsay Debbie Harrison Neeru Monga Aurélie Crégut Faiza Tasneem(Associate CIPD) David Hodges Irada Sadykhova Yukiko Hosomi? David McLean Andrii Suslenko Gary Parilis Maria Alice Jovinski Erik Samdahl Tristan Hack Adam McKinnon, PhD. Kerrian Soong Dr. Peter Schulz-Rittich Timo Tischer Martijn Wiertz Shuba Gopal Martha Curioni Tobias W. Goers ツ Galo Lopez Noriega Patrick Coolen Brian Heger Hanadi El Sayyed Marcela Niemeyer Alicia Roach Dawn Klinghoffer Heather Muir Selina Millstam Dave Millner Dan George Nick Lynn Marc Voi Chiuli. (MSc. HRM. Assoc CIPD. MIHRM.) Ankit Saxena, MBA Volker Jacobs David Simmonds FCIPD Amit Mohindra Andrew Pitts Burak Bakkaloglu Malgorzata Langlois Isabel Naidoo David van Lochem Diane Gherson Marino Mugayar-Baldocchi Neha Asthana Irene Wong Jaejin Lee Anna A. Tavis, PhD Doug Shagam Geetanjali Gamel Matt Elk Tina Peeters, PhD Barry Swales Bob Pulver David Duewel Matt Higgs MBA FCIPD Meghan M. Biro Sebastian Knepper Kathleen Kruse Dorothy Dalton Kate Graham Laura Thurston Søren Kold Jacob Nielsen Ralf Buechsenschuss Nicole Hazard Tatu Westling Sue Lam Chris Lovato Joseph Frank, PhD CCP GWCCM Tom Morehead PCC,MBA,SPHR Ian OKeefe Lina Makneviciute RJ Milnor Nicole Lettich Mariana Saintive Sousa Jon Kirchhoff Roberto Amatucci Christopher Rosett Rebecca Thielen Morten Hartvig Berg John Gunawan Soumya Bonantaya MBA MS SWP Ronald Schep Daorong Lin Abhilash Bodanapu Morgan Baldwin Jack Liu Sanja Licina, Ph.D. Piyush Mehta Sebastian Kolberg Jaap Veldkamp Craig Starbuck, PhD Sukumaran Mariappan Felipe Jara Michal Gradshtein Dave Fineman Stephen Hickey Gal Mozes, PhD Agnes Garaba Emily Pelosi, PhD Kelly Satterfield Laurent Reich Brandon Roberts Lewis Garrad Danielle Bushen Nick Hudgell Andrew Kilshaw Higor Gomes Pietro Mazzoleni Marcela Mury Giovanna Constant Mia Norgren Ohad Geron
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
David Green ?? is a globally respected author, speaker, conference chair, and executive consultant on people analytics, data-driven HR and the future of work. As Managing Partner and Executive Director at Insight222, he has overall responsibility for the delivery of the Insight222 People Analytics Program, which supports the advancement of people analytics in over 90 global organisations. Prior to co-founding Insight222, David accumulated over 20 years experience in the human resources and people analytics fields, including as Global Director of People Analytics Solutions at IBM. As such, David has extensive experience in helping organisations increase value, impact and focus from the wise and ethical use of people analytics. David also hosts the Digital HR Leaders Podcast and is an instructor for Insight222's myHRfuture Academy. His book, co-authored with Jonathan Ferrar, Excellence in People Analytics: How to use Workforce Data to Create Business Value was published in the summer of 2021.
MEET ME AT THESE EVENTS
I'll be speaking about people analytics, the future of work, and data driven HR at a number of upcoming events in 2024:
September 11 - Productivity, Purpose, and Profit: How to thrive in ‘25 (London)
September 16-19 - Workday Rising (Las Vegas)
September 24-26 - Insight222 Global Executive Retreat (Colorado, US) - exclusively for member organisations of the Insight222 People Analytics Program
October 2-3 - People Analytics World (New York)
October 16-17 - UNLEASH World (Paris)
October 22-23 - Insight222 North American Peer Meeting (hosted by Workday in Pleasanton, CA) - exclusively for member organisations of the Insight222 People Analytics Program
November 12-14 - Workday Rising EMEA (London)
November 19-20 - Insight222 European Peer Meeting (hosted by Merck in Darmstadt, Germany) - exclusively for member organisations of the Insight222 People Analytics Program
More events will be added as they are confirmed.
头条
头条
头条
头条
头条
头条
头条
头条
头条
头条
扫一扫
添加客服
