AI Agents, The New Workforce We’re Not Quite Ready For (Agentic AI)Josh Bersin 刚刚谈到：AI代理人的兴起标志着工作方式的一次革命。这些AI代理人不仅仅是工具，而是未来的团队成员。从开发培训课程到管理招聘过程，AI代理人的能力正被企业系统广泛利用。科技领袖和投资者对此展现出了极大的兴趣和投资。企业需要为这种变革做好准备，包括安全性和管理实践的更新。
我们一起来看下，英文原文附录链接在最后！
AI智能体，新一代劳动力，我们还没有做好准备
智能体正在到来，智能体正在到来。
如果你关注AI技术市场，你就会知道，最近有很多关于“智能体AI”的讨论。换句话说，我们的AI助手开始拥有更多自主能力。不再只是回答问题和写诗，它们现在可以代表我们“做事情”。
这正是长久以来预测的AI下一个大趋势。埃里克·施密特最近谈到了这一点，微软也在讨论，像Mayfield这样的投资者正在投入资金。而这种演变确实将彻底革新我们的系统。
可以这样想：“大语言模型”是我们过去两年一直在学习的内容，它们现在正逐步转变为“大行动模型”。智能体不仅仅会回答问题，它还会为我们做事情。
消费场景是无穷无尽的：为我预订航班，为我买票，向我的朋友发送电子邮件。但在商业领域，这种转变将颠覆并破坏我们的许多企业系统。它还将改变我们工作的方式、管理的方式以及我们对团队的思考方式。
考虑我们与供应商讨论的两个HR用例。
学习与发展（L&D）AI智能体
想象一下，你指示一个L&D AI智能体“为我们的销售人员创建一个15分钟的课程，以教授他们如何定位我们的新产品”。AI智能体将根据你的输入（课程时长、目标受众等），向主题专家发送电子邮件，视频记录他们的评论和专业知识，整合新产品信息，构建课程，并将其发送给L&D负责人进行验证。作为经理，你可以审查课程，并指示智能体收紧信息或添加更多主题，课程将重新创建，然后你可以说“可以上线了”。智能体随后会将课程发布到学习管理系统（LMS）中，向所有销售人员群发电子邮件，并开始监控学习活动。几小时后，智能体会运行分析，并向经理反馈进展情况。
是的，这在今天完全可能。而且很快就会启动。
再来看第二个例子。
招聘AI智能体
人才招聘负责人收到了大量关于高级软件工程师的职位要求。她指示招聘AI智能体开始搜索。智能体询问招聘人员的地点偏好、职位级别选择、薪资范围和技能要求，然后开始工作。智能体扫描LinkedIn和其他招聘工具，查看ATS中的现有候选人，同时也查看所有内部员工的合格技能。智能体随后优化这份名单，创建一个“面试候选人短名单”，并回到招聘负责人那里征求意见。在就地点和薪资范围达成一致后，智能体返回并向这些候选人发送了一封富有吸引力的电子邮件，并附上一个视频面试门户链接，让他们进行面试。面试被录制下来，AI智能体使用面试智能工具来评估和筛选候选人，询问他们的时间安排，并为他们安排现场面试。在此过程中，AI智能体会查看他们的背景，搜索社交媒体，查看他们的各种联系，并可能查看他们的GitHub等平台和其他凭证，然后为每位候选人创建一个档案。
这些智能体很快就会出现，对我们许多人来说，它们看起来和感觉上会像“员工”一样。我们将不得不对它们进行培训、入职和指导。随着它们在各自的角色中“成熟”并成长，我们将它们连接到更多的系统、更多的人和更多的数据上。
Lattice的首席执行官萨拉·富兰克林大约一个月前实际上提出了这个概念，尽管遭到了反对声音，但我认为她是对的。这些智能体实际上将属于组织结构图的一部分。我们的工作将是管理它们，确保它们的安全，并监督它们的安全性。
还有更多内容即将到来
虽然感觉像科幻小说，但这一切正在发生。而且它不仅将改变我们的HR技术堆栈，还将改变整个企业技术格局，也让我们的HR角色变得更加轻松。
原文来自: https://joshbersin.com/2024/09/agentic-ai-ai-agents-the-new-workforce-were-not-quite-ready-for/
观点
2024年09月06日
观点
Indeed 职业定义中的年龄歧视引发的轩然大波 The Uproar Over Ageism in Career Definitions by Indeed最近的Indeed报告将45岁定义为“职业晚期”、55岁以上为“职业衰退”，引发了对年龄歧视的批评。专家如Lyndsey Simpson强调，这种标签不仅有害，还忽视了老年工作者的潜力。尽管该报告旨在描述职业阶段，但其用语引起了广泛反响，最终导致信息图的删除。像Elizabeth Isele这样的倡导者强调，多代工作力的好处，如更强的人才管道和增强的工作稳定性。
最近，Indeed的一份报告因将45岁定义为“职业晚期”、55岁以上定义为“衰退”而被批评为“年龄歧视”。来自Freelance Informer的报道指出，55Redefined Group的创始人兼首席执行官、全球老龄化人口价值专家Lyndsey Simpson在LinkedIn上发文，批评该平台发布了她所视为“公然的年龄歧视和不负责任的内容”。
Indeed的信息图将45岁定义为“职业晚期”、55岁以上为“衰退”，同时将35-45岁称为“职业中期”。根据Freelance Informer的报道，该信息图在多次投诉后已被撤下。
Simpson表示：“在55岁以上，数百万人正在他们选择的职业中找到自己的步伐，或者正在重新技能培训，重新回到劳动力市场，或者开始新的企业。”
Simpson认为，Indeed的指南延续了有害的刻板印象，削弱了老年工作者的潜力。她敦促公司认识到老年工作者的价值，并起来反对过时的偏见。
Next Up招聘机构的首席执行官Victoria Tomlinson说：“感谢成千上万分享、评论和发送电子邮件的人——Indeed已经撤下了这篇文章。”
尽管在Tomlinson的评论之后该图形仍可见一段时间，但现已被删除。
全球经验丰富的企业家精神研究所创始人Elizabeth Isele为Indeed的报告做出了贡献。她在报告中说：“多代工作力具有明显的竞争优势，原因有很多。立即，雇主就能开辟更强大、更广泛的人才渠道。你会得到一个更大的想法基因池。提高你的劳动力的连续性和稳定性。并在该劳动力中保留知识。”Isele指出，预计到2030年，55岁以上的工作者将增加1.5亿。
观点
2024年09月03日
观点
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/
观点
2024年08月31日
观点
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.
观点
2024年08月10日
观点
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/
HR如何可以成为组织中的影响者 How HR Can Become an Organizational Influencer文章《HR如何成为组织的影响者》强调了HR在推动组织变革中的关键作用，通过战略影响而非正式权力来驱动变革。HR专业人员可以通过利用他们对人力动态的深入理解、战略思维和沟通技巧，成为关键的影响者。文章列出了HR需要掌握的八项核心能力，包括战略影响力、讲故事的能力、公共演讲、协作影响力、外交、信息传递、冲突解决和执行力。
通过发展这些技能，HR可以有效地驾驭变革，激励行动，并将人员战略与业务目标对齐。
变革不仅是不可避免的，而且是推动个人和组织成长与创新的动力。在工作中，变革可以推动一个组织向前发展并提升其水平，也可以摧毁它（包括其中的员工）。组织如何应对变革？是通过纯粹的角色权威？还是通过高层领导的强制命令？亦或是通过那些没有“正式权威”的人以更微妙的方式来推动和引导变革的方向？
在大多数组织中，人力资源（HR）没有像其他部门那样拥有正式的权力或影响力。通常，HR人员不足，资源匮乏。即使在过去几年中人力资源职能快速发展，HR在工作中仍在努力建立其战略价值。对于HR来说，推动或引导变革的力量不是正式的权力或“蛮力”，而是战略影响力（strategic influence）。
本质上，战略影响力不是关于权威，而是关于灵感、创新以及对工作中人类元素的深刻理解。讽刺的是，一些拥有强大职位的领导者除了他们头衔赋予的权力外，没有任何影响力。相反，一些在工作中没有头衔的普通人，却是通过利用他们的影响力来推动和引导变革的真正变革者。
有时HR确实有正式的权力，但更多时候没有。这就是为什么它必须更多地依赖影响力而不是正式的权威。
组织中的影响者 组织中的影响者是变革的催化剂，是能够理解业务战略与人类动态之间联系的愿景者。不同于源自层级权力的传统影响力，组织中的影响者的影响力来自于他们连接、理解和激励人的能力。
组织中的影响者具有一些基本特质，包括：
战略思考：看到更大的图景，并将努力与整体组织目标对齐。
以同理心领导：理解并重视他人的观点和需求。
有效沟通：通过清晰和信念表达想法并激励行动。
适应力强：拥抱变革并帮助他人应对变革。
用数据决策：利用数据洞察来决策和制定策略。
与他人合作并建立伙伴关系：建立伙伴关系并在组织各个层面促进团队合作。
创新：不断寻找和实施创造性的解决方案。
有韧性：在面对挫折时保持专注和积极。
伦理和诚信：坚持诚信并促进信任和尊重的文化。
让HR成为组织影响者的8种方式 以下是HR可以用来成为组织影响者的八种方法：
1 - 战略影响力 战略影响力是关于利用HR在人员领导和业务管理方面的独特见解来推动业务策略，确保人员与业务目标对齐并推动其前进。这个概念体现了HR领导者不仅是参与者，而且是董事会中的关键策略家，倡导促进组织成长和员工满意度的政策和实践。 这些是需要掌握的五项能力：
制定并执行与组织领导力对齐的有影响力的HR策略。
通过战略性HR举措影响高层管理和决策。
在整个组织中建立战略伙伴关系以增强HR的影响力。
使用HR洞察分析和解决复杂的组织挑战。
指导和发展HR团队以增强战略思维能力。
2 - 讲故事 讲故事是HR专业人士的一个强大工具，使他们能够将组织的价值观、文化和目标联系起来形成引人入胜的叙述。这种方法不仅增强了沟通，还建立了情感连接，使HR举措更易于理解和影响深远。通过讲故事，HR可以有效地倡导变革，庆祝成功，并阐明业务决策中的人性化一面，将抽象概念转化为在整个组织中产生共鸣的有意义的故事。 这些是需要掌握的五项能力：
创作引人入胜的叙述以传达HR的愿景和价值观。
使用有说服力的讲故事技巧吸引多样化的受众。
利用讲故事推动组织变革。
根据不同的沟通媒介调整讲故事的风格。
使用叙事智能增强HR的说服力。
3 - 出色的公众演讲 出色的公众演讲使HR领导者能够以权威和激情进行沟通，影响并激励他人。出色的公众演讲不仅仅是大声说话或喋喋不休，而是关于自信、同理心和理解。这项技能对于倡导HR举措、分享洞察和引导塑造组织未来的讨论至关重要。精通的公众演讲使HR领导者成为能够吸引听众的强大演说者，无论是在小型团队会议还是大型企业聚会上，都能有效传达HR的战略价值。 这些是需要掌握的五项能力：
掌握适用于HR背景的公众演讲技巧。
通过有效的演讲技巧吸引和激励受众。
利用公众演讲作为HR倡导和影响的工具。
根据不同类型的受众和组织层级调整演讲内容。
制作能够引起利益相关者共鸣的引人入胜的演讲内容。
4 - 协作影响力 协作影响力侧重于HR建立和维护推动组织成功的战略业务伙伴关系的能力。它突显了HR在弥合部门间差距、促进跨职能团队合作以及将HR策略与更广泛的业务目标对齐方面的作用。通过协作，HR可以打破孤岛，促进团结，并确保人员策略是实现公司目标的重要组成部分。 这些是需要掌握的五项能力：
建立和维持支持HR目标的有影响力的业务伙伴关系。
促进HR与其他业务单位之间的合作。
利用人际交往技能增强HR的协作影响力。
协商并对齐HR策略与更广泛的业务目标。
培养支持和倡导HR举措的盟友网络。
5 - 外交技巧 HR的外交技巧是关于以策略性智慧和策略性技巧驾驭复杂的组织政治网络。它涉及以尊重不同观点的方式倡导HR政策和举措，同时推动进步性变革。HR外交官善于建立共识、管理冲突，并将HR定位为组织决策中的中立但有影响力的参与者，确保在业务策略中始终考虑人员因素。 这些是需要掌握的五项能力：
利用外交技巧驾驭和影响组织政治。
使用策略性沟通技巧倡导HR驱动的变革。
通过外交解决复杂的组织问题。
在不同利益相关者群体中建立共识。
在所有HR举措中以诚信和伦理领导。
6 - 信息掌控 HR的信息掌控是关于编写和传达清晰表述HR策略价值和影响的信息。它是将沟通调整到不同受众的能力，确保清晰、参与和支持HR举措。通过有效的信息传达，HR专业人士可以解密HR政策，倡导组织变革，并巩固HR在组织内作为关键沟通者的角色。 这些是需要掌握的五项能力：
制定清晰有影响力的HR举措沟通策略。
调整HR信息以引起不同组织受众的共鸣。
以易于理解的方式传达复杂的HR概念。
有效利用各种沟通渠道传递HR信息。
测量和分析HR沟通策略的影响。
7 - 冲突解决和达成共识 冲突解决和达成共识在维护和谐和高效的工作环境中至关重要。这个概念围绕HR调解争议、促进谈判和培养合作与相互尊重环境的能力。通过为HR专业人士配备解决冲突的技能，组织可以确保更顺畅的运营、增强的团队合作以及一个重视建设性对话而非对抗的文化。 这些是需要掌握的五项能力：
有效调解和解决工作场所冲突。
促进合作和建设性的谈判过程。
在冲突各方之间建立共识以实现组织和谐。
实施预防和管理冲突的主动策略。
培训和指导团队冲突解决和达成共识的技能。
8 - 领导风范 HR影响者的领导风范和领导力是关于体现那些在组织各个层面上赢得尊重和激发信心的品质。这包括培养一种真实、权威和平易近人的领导风格，使HR领导者能够有效地倡导战略举措并以身作则。凭借强大的领导风范，HR专业人士可以更有效地影响结果、推动战略决策，并倡导以人为本的业务方法。 这些是需要掌握的五项能力：
培养权威且真实的领导风格。
提升高层沟通技巧。
建立战略关系。
以自信和愿景领导。
通过变革性领导实践激励团队和个人。
英文原来来自：https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-hr-can-become-organizational-influencer-hacking-hr-0xnlc/
作者：Hacking HR
Change is not just inevitable, but the driving force behind personal and organizational growth and innovation.
At work, change can either propel an organization forward and lift it up, or break it (including its people).
How can organizations navigate change? Is it through pure role-based authority? Is it through the brute force of senior leadership mandates? Or is there a more subtle way in which people, without “formal authority”, may drive and even steer the direction of change?
In most organizations, Human Resources (HR) does not have the formal authority or power that some of its counterparts have. Generally, HR is understaffed and under-resourced. And, even with the rapid advancement of the people function in the past few years, HR is still on the road to building its strategic value at work.
For HR, it is not formal authority or “brute force” that drives or steers change, it is the power of strategic influence.
In essence, strategic influence is not about authority, but inspiration, innovation, and a deep understanding of the human element at work.
Ironically, some leaders with a powerful position have no influence other than that given to them by their titles. In contrast, some ordinary people at work, without a title, are real change makers with potent network effects at work given how they leverage their influence to drive and steer change.
Sometimes HR does have the formal authority, but often it does not. That’s why it has to rely more on the power of influence than on the power of formal authority.
Organizational Influencers
An organizational influencer is a catalyst for change, a visionary who understands the connection business strategy and human dynamics. Unlike traditional notions of influence that stem from hierarchical power, organizational influencers derive their impact from their ability to connect, understand, and inspire people.
An organizational influencer has some foundational attributes, including:
Thinking strategically: Sees the bigger picture and aligns efforts with overarching organizational goals.
Leading with empathy: Understands and values the perspectives and needs of others.
Communicating effectively: Articulates ideas and inspires action through clarity and conviction.
Adapting: Embraces change and helps others navigate through it.
Informing decisions with data: Leverages insights from data to inform decisions and strategies.
Collaborating with others and building partnerships: Builds partnerships and fosters teamwork across all levels of the organization.
Innovating: Constantly seeks and implements creative solutions to challenges.
Being resilient: Maintains focus and positivity in the face of setbacks.
Behaving ethically and with integrity: Upholds integrity and promotes a culture of trust and respect.
8 Ways for HR to Becomes an Organizational Influencer
These are nine ways HR can use to become an organizational influencer.
1 - Strategic Influence
Strategic influence is about leveraging HR's unique insights into people leadership and business management to drive business strategies, ensuring that people align with and propels business objectives forward. This concept embodies the idea that HR leaders are not just participants but key strategists in the boardroom, advocating for policies and practices that foster both organizational growth and employee satisfaction.
These are five competencies to master:
Develop and execute impactful HR strategies aligned with organizational leadership.
Influence top-level management and decision-making through strategic HR initiatives.
Foster strategic partnerships across the organization to enhance HR's influence.
Analyze and address complex organizational challenges using HR insights.
Mentor and develop HR teams to strengthen strategic thinking skills.
2 - Storytelling
Storytelling is a powerful tool for HR professionals, enabling them to connect the dots between organization's values, culture, and goals into compelling narratives. This approach not only enhances communication but also builds emotional connections, making HR initiatives more relatable and impactful. Through storytelling, HR can effectively champion change, celebrate successes, and articulate the human side of business decisions, transforming abstract concepts into meaningful stories that resonate across the organization.
These are five competencies to master:
Craft compelling narratives to communicate HR vision and values.
Engage diverse audiences with persuasive storytelling techniques.
Leverage storytelling to drive organizational change.
Adapt storytelling styles to fit various communication mediums.
Use narrative intelligence to enhance HR's persuasive power.
3 - Public Speaking Excellence
Public speaking excellence empowers HR leaders to communicate with authority and passion, influencing and inspiring others at work. People speaking excellence is not about being loud or never shutting up, but about confidence, empathy and understanding. This skill is crucial for advocating HR initiatives, sharing insights, and leading discussions that shape the organization's future. Masterful public speaking turns HR leaders into powerful orators who can captivate their listeners, whether in small team meetings or large corporate gatherings, effectively conveying the strategic value of HR.
These are five competencies to master:
Master public speaking skills tailored for HR contexts.
Engage and motivate audiences through effective speech delivery techniques.
Utilize public speaking as a tool for HR advocacy and influence.
Adapt speeches to various audience types and organizational levels.
Develop compelling presentation content that resonates with stakeholders.
4 - Collaborative Influence
Collaborative influence focuses on HR’s capacity to forge and maintain strategic business partnerships that drive organizational success. It highlights HR’s role in bridging gaps between departments, facilitating cross-functional teams, and aligning HR strategies with broader business objectives. Through collaboration, HR can dismantle silos, encourage unity, and ensure that people strategies are integral to achieving corporate goals.
These are five competencies to master:
Build and sustain influential business partnerships that support HR goals.
Facilitate collaboration between HR and other business units.
Leverage interpersonal skills to enhance HR’s collaborative impact.
Negotiate and align HR strategies with broader business objectives.
Cultivate a network of allies to support and advocate for HR initiatives.
5 - Diplomacy
HR diplomacy is about navigating the complex web of organizational politics with tact and strategic acumen. It involves advocating for HR policies and initiatives in a way that respects differing viewpoints while pushing for progressive change. HR diplomats are adept at building consensus, managing conflicts, and positioning HR as a neutral yet influential player in organizational decisions, ensuring that the people aspect is always considered in business strategies.
These are five competencies to master:
Utilize diplomacy to navigate and influence organizational politics.
Advocate for HR-driven change using tactful and strategic communication.
Resolve complex organizational issues with diplomatic problem-solving.
Build consensus among diverse stakeholder groups.
Lead with integrity and ethical considerations in all HR initiatives.
6 - Message Mastery
Message mastery in HR is about crafting and delivering messages that clearly articulate the value and impact of HR strategies. It’s the ability to tailor communication to diverse audiences, ensuring clarity, engagement, and support for HR initiatives. Through effective messaging, HR professionals can demystify HR policies, champion organizational change, and solidify HR’s role as a key communicator within the organization.
These are five competencies to master:
Develop clear and impactful communication strategies for HR initiatives.
Tailor HR messaging to resonate with different organizational audiences.
Communicate complex HR concepts in an accessible manner.
Utilize various communication channels effectively for HR messaging.
Measure and analyze the impact of HR communication strategies.
7 - Conflict Resolution and Agreement Building
Conflict resolution and agreement building are fundamental in maintaining a harmonious and productive workplace. This concept revolves around HR's ability to mediate disputes, facilitate negotiations, and foster an environment of cooperation and mutual respect. By equipping HR professionals with the skills to navigate and resolve conflicts, organizations can ensure smoother operations, enhanced teamwork, and a culture that values constructive dialogue over confrontation.
These are five competencies to master:
Mediate and resolve workplace conflicts effectively.
Facilitate collaborative and constructive negotiation processes.
Build consensus among conflicting parties to achieve organizational harmony.
Implement proactive strategies to prevent and manage conflicts.
Train and guide teams in conflict resolution and agreement-building skills.
8 - Executive Presence
Executive presence and leadership for HR influencers are about embodying the qualities that command respect and inspire confidence at all levels of the organization. This includes cultivating a leadership style that is authentic, authoritative, and approachable, enabling HR leaders to effectively advocate for strategic initiatives and lead by example. With a strong executive presence, HR professionals can more effectively influence outcomes, drive strategic decisions, and champion a people-centric approach to business.
These are five competencies to master:
Cultivate an authoritative and authentic leadership style.
Enhance executive communication skills.
Build strategic relationships.
Lead with confidence and vision.
Inspire teams and individuals with transformative leadership practices.
观点
观点
观点
观点
观点
观点
观点
观点
观点
观点
扫一扫
添加客服
