As the chief human resource officer role evolves, CHROs face major opportunities for growth — but also numerous paradoxes that could redefine what it means to lead HR, according to a Dec. 2 report from The Josh Bersin Company.
Organizations are increasingly reliant on HR to guide adoption of artificial intelligence tools, skills development and talent strategy. However, gaps exist between where CHROs want their role to go and where the C-suite will allow it to go, the report found.
“What the data makes clear is that the future CHRO isn’t just a culture steward or operational leader; they are now a transformation driver at the center of business strategy,” Kathi Enderes, SVP of research for The Josh Bersin Company, said in a statement.
“And yet, the contradictions in the role are profound,” she said. “We expect CHROs to architect AI-enabled workforces and redesign talent systems but often fail to give them the time, resources or recognition afforded to other C-suite executives.”
CHRO roles are changing dramatically in today’s business landscape, particularly around challenges in succession planning, leadership pipelines and talent strategy, according to a DSG Global report. Most HR decision makers said the CHRO role is expanding in importance, yet corporate boards have too much power in driving talent strategy.
In fact, the people leader role may need “a deliberate redesign,” according to a report from McLean & Co. Continuous change and complexity are “pushing the role to an unsustainable point,” the research found, and the role needs to be reimagined to allow leaders to focus on “enabling people, fostering resilience and translating strategy into meaningful action.”
In The Josh Bersin Company report, five paradoxes emerged based on data from more than 25,000 CHRO profiles, a survey of 200 CHROs and 50 face-to-face interviews.
First, the transformation paradox shows that CHROs are expected to be both agents of rapid change and lasting culture. Among surveyed CHROs, 86% said their role is changing “significantly” or “dramatically,” yet average tenure has dropped from 6 to 4.8 years. Looking ahead, the challenge is whether CHROs can deliver AI-driven productivity fast enough to satisfy the C-suite, particularly if they don’t have CIO support or the right AI tools that actually deliver.
Second, the influence paradox indicates that CHROs are integral to business strategy — with 6 in 10 seeing themselves as equal to other C-suite leaders — yet only 12% rank among the top five highest-paid executives. In addition, many still struggle to secure buy-in for initiatives and are seen as the C-suite’s support role rather than a transformation leader.
Third, the diversity paradox notes that with a 68% female ratio, the CHRO role leads the C-suite in gender diversity, which could be both helpful and harmful. As CHROs become increasingly female, other C-suite roles remain predominantly male, posing a potentially challenging dynamic for leadership.
Fourth, the success pathway paradox finds that CHRO success relies on business acumen and cross-functional experience, yet most leaders still rise through traditional HR pathways. Only 3 in 10 CHROs have a business background, indicating a potential gap between what’s needed for leadership and the typical CHRO development path.
Fifth, the aspiration paradox reveals that CHROs aspire to broader executive or advisory roles, yet 42% move to lower-level HR positions after the C-suite, and only 5% become CEOs. Without a clear pathway to CEO, career opportunities may not seem apparent, often leading CHROs to move to new companies to look for new ways to add value.
To address these paradoxes, the report found, high-performing organizations are institutionalizing transformation through success planning and culture playbooks, embedding HR in business strategy, building diverse leadership pipelines and creating intentional pathways for CHROs to move into broader roles.