• Replies 13 replies
  • Subscribers 12 subscribers
  • Views 3245 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

Will HR and IT functions merge to reshape the role of the profession?

Steve Bridger

It's a bit of a provocative question, but not a hypothetical one.

In May, the huge biotech company Moderna merged its technology and HR departments under one executive, creating the new role of Chief People and Digital Technology Officer. This move reflected a broader push within the organisation to redesign work around human-AI collaboration (including the deployment of over 3,000 custom GPT agents to assist in - for example - performance management and benefits queries). We have discussed how the use of AI in recruiting is already rapidly accelerating that integration. AI in the workplace 

Is this a new trend - a fad that will blow over - or something that more organisations may adopt in the near future? 

This was another topic of discussion in this week's HR People Pod.

As the guests commented - this isn't about sticking two functions together to create a Frankenstein department - and HR will not be fixing employee laptops anytime soon - but the tywo functions already work closely - innovating, creating dashboards, etc. 

In few years ago a friend (who will remain nameless) rather harshly referred to the "cold hands of HR and IT". Can the two functions really merge together in err, warm embrace?

Parents
  • This move reflected a broader push within the organisation to redesign work around human-AI collaboration (including the deployment of over 3,000 custom GPT agents to assist in - for example - performance management and benefits queries).


    I've not been shy about the fact that I have *opinions* about artificial "intelligence" and the use of generative systems on all kinds of levels.

    However, I'll not re-hash these here. Instead, I'll point to experience of seeing HR clustered not under IT but under Finance or under Operations, and note that, in every single case, the responsible Director came from the discipline that *wasn't* HR. HR was always, without exception, seen as something that a director could "pick up" or which they could mostly leave to the subordinate experts and didn't need to be experts in themselves, so long as they were experts in finance or operations.

    If you merge IT and HR then, even with the best and most rational of intentions, what you really mean is that IT will be in charge of HR and, consequently, machines will be prioritised over people.

    This is exactly why the CIPD in particular has spent literal decades fighting to see more representation of HR at Board level. It is why the creation of the CPO, CHRO or HRD as Board-level or C-Suite roles was seen as so strategically important to the profession. Letting IT and HR merge relegates HR, once more, to a discipline that is seen as lesser, easier... something any reasonably intelligent business leader can be expected to have learned by osmosis.

    I'm sure I don't need to point out the inherent misogyny in this, as well.
Reply
  • This move reflected a broader push within the organisation to redesign work around human-AI collaboration (including the deployment of over 3,000 custom GPT agents to assist in - for example - performance management and benefits queries).


    I've not been shy about the fact that I have *opinions* about artificial "intelligence" and the use of generative systems on all kinds of levels.

    However, I'll not re-hash these here. Instead, I'll point to experience of seeing HR clustered not under IT but under Finance or under Operations, and note that, in every single case, the responsible Director came from the discipline that *wasn't* HR. HR was always, without exception, seen as something that a director could "pick up" or which they could mostly leave to the subordinate experts and didn't need to be experts in themselves, so long as they were experts in finance or operations.

    If you merge IT and HR then, even with the best and most rational of intentions, what you really mean is that IT will be in charge of HR and, consequently, machines will be prioritised over people.

    This is exactly why the CIPD in particular has spent literal decades fighting to see more representation of HR at Board level. It is why the creation of the CPO, CHRO or HRD as Board-level or C-Suite roles was seen as so strategically important to the profession. Letting IT and HR merge relegates HR, once more, to a discipline that is seen as lesser, easier... something any reasonably intelligent business leader can be expected to have learned by osmosis.

    I'm sure I don't need to point out the inherent misogyny in this, as well.
Children
No Data