Yes, HR Organizations Will (Partially) Be Replaced by AI, And That’s GoodI adore the human resources profession. These folks are responsible for hiring, development, leadership development, and some of the most important issues in business. And despite the history of HR being considered a compliance function, the role is more important than ever. CHRO salaries, for example, have increased at 5-times the rate of CEO pay over the last twenty years, demonstrating how essential HR has become.
That said, we have to be honest that AI is going to disrupt our role. This week IBM formally announced that 94% of typical HR questions are now answered by its AI agent, and the role of HR Business Partner is all but eliminated except for very senior leaders. As a result the CEO plans to reduce HR headcount and shift that budget towards sales and engineering.
Let’s accept the fact that we are in a time of increasing acceleration. In other words, the capabilities of AI are growing much faster than our organizations” ability to adapt, so we have to lean forward and start redesigning our companies. In the case of HR, our Systemic HR model (which we launched two years ago) is now being fully automated by AI.
I know IBM’s story well, and I think it explains where all HR teams are going. Many years ago Diane Gherson (prior CHRO) started AI projects to automate recruitment, pay analysis, and performance management. She spoke at our conference eight years ago and shared how IBM’s pay tool (CogniPay was launched in 2018) uses AI to make pay recommendations based on skill. This type of tool, which was years ahead of the “skills-based” strategies we see today, essentially automated many of the performance and pay decisions left to managers.
Since then IBM has gone much further, and in my last conversation with Nickle Lamoureux (current CHRO) she told me the AI agent helps write performance reviews, creates development plans, and coaches managers and senior leaders on a myriad of performance based decisions. I totally believe this because I see Galileo doing these kinds of things for companies every day. (Check out the Mercury release.)
How does this impact the roles and jobs in HR? Well it definitely eliminates many.
In the case of L&D or HR business partners, I believe we could see a 20-30% or more reduction in HR headcount per employee. And that means these individuals may wind up managing the AI platforms, moving into roles as change consultants (which AI still can’t do), or move into areas like org design, learning architect, and data management.
I think this is all a good thing. While we all worry about AI taking our jobs, we have to remember that our real job is not to “do things” but to “add value” and bring complex problem solving skills to our companies. And in this journey to “crawl up the value curve,” we all have to learn to use AI, develop AI solutions, and think more systemically about how our companies go to market.
I recently interviewed a brilliant HR leader (podcast coming) at WPP who explained how he and his team rationalized their job architecture from 65,000 job titles to only 600 by using new AI tools from OpenAI and Reejig (a work intelligence vendor). As you’ll hear in his story, this effort was a combination of data management, business analysis, change management, and leadership. The results of this work, which are still ongoing, is the opportunity for WPP to dramatically change its go to market strategy, innovation, and growth.
That’s the kind of thing we want our HR teams to do.
And as these various agents hit the market (see my latest view of the market below), HR professionals are going to have to train them, implement them, and “manage them” for long term success. This means analyzing the cross-functional data they produce, extend them into better decision-making, and move our thinking from dated concepts like “time to hire” and “course completion rates” to meaningful measures like “time to revenue” or “time to productivity” or “time to customer service excellence.”
See where I’m going? In a time of increasing technology acceleration we have to “lean in” as hard as we can.
Stop thinking about how much money we save on headcount (which is a fleeting benefit, by the way) and focus on value creation. That’s the big benefit of AI: customer service quality, time to market, and innovation.
In many ways these “HR downsizing” stories are really stores of “HR crawling up the value curve,” which is really a good thing. And for HR professionals, it’s a time for personal reinvention.
organizational change
2025年05月16日
organizational change
马斯克的反HR管理模式：从企业到联邦政府Elon Musk’s approach to workforce management, first seen during his Twitter takeover, is now playing out on a national scale. As an advisor to the Trump administration and head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Musk is applying his “lean efficiency” philosophy to federal bureaucracy. His tenure at companies like Tesla, SpaceX, and X has been marked by mass layoffs, rigid accountability, and controversial HR policies. While his leadership style prioritizes efficiency and rapid change, it often leads to legal challenges and employee dissatisfaction. Organizations can learn from Musk’s aggressive tactics by balancing accountability with strategic communication and employee well-being.
当一封名为**“十字路口的选择”（A Fork in the Road）**的邮件突然出现在员工的收件箱中，内容警告他们若不回复将被视为自动辞职时，许多人感到不安。这种强硬的管理手段并不是新鲜事，而是埃隆·马斯克（Elon Musk）多年来一贯的管理风格。
早在2022年11月，马斯克收购推特（现X）后，他便裁掉了近一半的员工，并迅速废除远程办公政策，要求所有员工返回办公室，除非获得他的个人批准。随后，他发出了一封标志性的邮件，要求留下来的员工接受“极度硬核”的工作模式，即高强度、长时间的工作节奏。
这次大刀阔斧的改革为外界提供了一个窗口，让人们得以一窥马斯克的管理哲学：极端效率、高度问责、快速决策。这一模式已在他旗下的多家公司——特斯拉（Tesla）、SpaceX 和 Neuralink 等得到了体现，如今，他正试图将其应用到美国联邦政府。作为特朗普政府的顾问及“政府效率部”（DOGE）负责人，马斯克正在推行一系列激进的机构改革，包括裁员、重组和强化绩效考核制度，而这些措施无一不让人想起当初的推特改革。
HR眼中的马斯克模式
尽管马斯克因创新和商业成就备受推崇，但他的管理风格在HR领域却争议不断。过去十年间，特斯拉因工作环境问题、种族歧视指控、加州工厂的安全隐患等多次被起诉。2024年，特斯拉刚刚解决了一起涉及多次陪审团裁决的歧视案件，而SpaceX和Neuralink也因不公平的劳动实践和工作环境问题受到关注。X（推特）更是深陷与前员工的法律纠纷，许多前员工因被裁员后未能获得合法的遣散补偿而成功通过仲裁维权。
更值得关注的是，马斯克的企业文化刻意削弱传统HR机制。2020年，特斯拉曾推出一份被称为“反手册”（Anti-Handbook）的员工手册，明确表示公司不推崇传统的规章制度，认为“政策和规则只是为了设定最低标准，而我们不是那样的公司。”这一理念强调员工的高绩效要求，但也意味着更少的保护和支持。
从企业到联邦政府：HR的挑战与机遇
如今，这一反HR模式正被复制到联邦政府。最明显的例子之一是美国人事管理办公室（OPM）近期向部分政府雇员发出的裁员通知，邮件的标题恰好也是“十字路口的选择”。在政府机构，马斯克正在推行更严苛的绩效管理体系，例如要求员工每周提交五项工作成果，然而，这种方式在高度官僚化的政府机构中难以实施，并已导致部分裁员决策被法院驳回。
专家分析指出，马斯克的模式核心在于高度问责，但缺乏过渡和沟通，这也是其争议所在。“他的管理风格强调立刻执行，而不是渐进式调整，” 谈判专家安德烈斯·拉雷斯（Andres Lares）表示，“但在政府这样的大型机构中，像泰坦尼克号掉头一样，不可能一夜之间完成变革。”
与此同时，HR行业也在思考如何应对这一趋势。一方面，组织可以学习马斯克在提升效率方面的成功经验，打造更具执行力的文化；另一方面，企业需要避免极端化，确保变革过程中员工的信任和稳定性。例如，在远程办公问题上，马斯克持强硬立场，认为“远程办公的员工大多是假装工作”，但HR专家指出，灵活办公模式对于许多员工（如照顾家庭的职场人士）至关重要，过度削减灵活性可能会导致人才流失。
结语：HR该如何应对马斯克模式？
马斯克的HR模式已经不再局限于企业，而是进入了政府机构，并可能对未来的管理模式产生深远影响。对于HR从业者来说，这是一个思考如何平衡效率、问责与员工福祉的机会。HR需要关注的不仅是绩效，还包括组织文化、信任和沟通方式。企业可以借鉴马斯克的高效执行力，但要避免因过度强调效率而破坏员工关系。
毕竟，一个可持续的组织，不能只靠“极端效率”运作。
作者：Ryan Golden
organizational change
organizational change
organizational change
organizational change
扫一扫
添加客服
