If we define the things that make us uniquely human as our capacity for creativity, empathy, and emotional intelligence, does the modern way of working really allow its workforce to utilize their capabilities on that regard, or are we use people as temporary placeholders for tasks that machines are yet able to complete? I’ve arrived at my current opinion that AI won’t replace people in the workplace; it will make us more human.

Knowledge arbitrage has morphed HR into a standalone function and a profession. As AI is making knowledge and information more readily available, the closing of this arbitrage gap is what’s driving the sentiment that the function may not exist in the next few years.

Prior technology shifts used to be about function, whereas AI is fundamentally about communication. It’s the communication between humans and machines that yields a higher caliber output. This means that the design and adoption challenge here isn’t just functional; it’s conversational, emotional, and, in a way, playful.

Humans are biased (consciously or unconsciously), and bias is a part of our survival mechanism. However, when we started automating many of our HR processes with AI in the name of efficiency and productivity, we now get to see patterns emerge based on our historical decisions. Ethical AI isn’t about the technology. We are not debugging code here; we are effectively trying to debug culture.

In February 2024, I made a few life-changing decisions, one of which was to dive head-first into the world of AI and figure out what the next iteration of work technology would look like. After a year of doing this, I am starting to see patterns emerge on what makes customers buy, what makes HR and work tech companies successful, and changes in my investment mindset.

Use DeepSeek as an example the next time you are being questioned if a new talent management plan or culture transformation will work. DeepSeek is proof that it will work as long as you are willing to put the work behind it, consistently, and across the organization.

Jevons' Paradox in HR simply puts an official name to what we have known all along: HR has not saved money from technology; it has reallocated that money into more sophisticated strategies, insights, and tools. This mirrors Jevons' Paradox—efficiency doesn’t reduce consumption; it often fuels more investment and higher expectations.

In the past year, I’ve picked up a few things in contract reviews and negotiations that I didn’t always think about when I was in my HR role (because, hey, Legal’s got it, right?), and now wish I could pass this onto my past self. So, here is to hoping that my pain is your gain when it comes to lessons learned in contract reviews

Starting in early 2023, there has been more talk about how AI can be the pixie dust that HR didn’t think it needed to make it more strategic in less time and with less effort than ever before. After all, all you had to do was sign on the dotted line of a 3-year SaaS licensing commitment, and the tech would take care of everything else, right?

I had a digital "can I talk to a real person??" moment this week, and something tells me that I may not be the only one experiencing this in 2025. In our relentless pursuit of efficiency and productivity (Bye, 2024), we may have forgotten a bit about human connections. So, this week I'm digging into the need for more EI in the age of AI. I'd love to get your thoughts on this too!

HR functions are struggling to stay relevant in their organizations. As a result, more HR teams are requesting their solution providers to help them prove the ROI on technology. Here’s the problem: HR’s ROI cannot be calculated by external parties in isolation of each solution purchased. In other words, if you rely on your vendors to help you calculate ROI, you are going about this the wrong way. ROI is something that HR people need to help themselves with first.

Over the little while, I have learned that being ready for AI is less about knowing the technology and the technical stuff; and more about having clarity in your organizational objectives and adaptability in your execution. In a world filled with ambiguity and about to get much more ambiguous, having clarity in the end goal is the key to thriving.

I am sure we have all heard some variation of the “if they only understood what we do and how complicated everything is, then they would appreciate how little we are working with” sentiment. If we can bend reality, I would love for a world where each corporate function understands, appreciates, and empathizes with the pain of other functions. However, since reality is not ideal, we need to work with what we have and can control— the HR function and everything in it.

The short answer is no. The long answer is that it depends on a few factors, such as: Are you currently doing HR Reporting or People Analytics? Are you regurgitating data or interpreting it for insights? Are most of your tasks repetitive, or do you work on a project basis? Are you a consumer of data or an influencer of data? Are you reactive or proactive in your approach?

Human tenancy plays the most significant role in any implementation program. You can have the best technology, the best implementation team, and the most abundant resources available, but if you don’t address some basic human tenancies, the implementation program will become challenging

“We just don’t have time for this right now” is a common theme in HR. It feels like no matter how hard HR teams work, the work is never done, and some projects get pushed out further and further. While technology promises to alleviate some of the team’s workload, reality can often be different—the more technology you plug in, the more work your team takes on. This is incredibly counterintuitive. So, where and when does it stop?

To be honest (and at the risk of aging myself), even today, when someone says AI, Tom Cruise and The Minority Report come to mind. Over the years, sci-fi literature and the entertainment industry have finessed the man vs. machine archetype. With AI becoming a trending topic in the professional world, some illogical beliefs are now permeating the content that I hear and interact with.

Just like doing pull-ups at the gym, becoming an HR Tech professional doesn’t happen overnight. We all have to start with knee pushups. While I cannot teach you how to go from knee pushups to full pull-ups, I can summarize the thinking patterns of some HR Tech and People Analytics pros out there so you can use them to become a pro yourself.

HR cloud tech has been around for over two decades. Yet, some HR leaders are still struggling to understand their technology landscape and how technology is integral to their overall strategy. So much so that I have heard the words, “We’ll just let the techies deal with this” in meeting rooms. If we can’t “get it” as a function in 20 years, do we stand a chance of fully understanding and utilizing tech in HR in the next five years?

Throughout my career, I have always heard two opposing ideas in HR Tech: 1) technology ignores the Human Touch, and 2) technology is needed to ensure the Human Touch experience continues. How can both ideas exist at the same time? I have started to make sense of it this week, and I'm inviting you to join me in deciphering the Human Touch Fallacy in HR.