June 24, 2025 • 16 mins
This week on Your Work Friends, we’re diving into two hot topics shaking up the future of work.
1️⃣ The surprising new jobs AI is creating and why your taste and creativity might be the most valuable skills you bring to the table.
First, we explore 22 new jobs AI is expected to create — and why your taste (yes, your vibe, your style, your point of view) could become your biggest career asset in an AI-driven world. We’re talking about AI auditors, world designers, and why creativity is about to pay off big.
2️⃣Why some companies are getting rid of HR altogether — and whether that’s a smart move or a big mistake.
Then, should HR go away? We break down why some CEOs are scrapping HR entirely, what that really means, and why splitting HR into two teams (compliance vs. people) might actually save your workplace.
We cover:
✔️ What happens when companies ditch HR
✔️ The growing split between compliance and people strategy
✔️ How AI is transforming job markets
✔️ New roles like AI auditors, world builders, and taste makers
✔️ How to future-proof your career in an AI-driven workplace
If you’re a corporate leader, manager, or just trying to stay ahead in your career, this one’s for you.
Should HR evolve or die? And are you ready for the new AI-powered workplace?
We jammed about:
AI Might Take Your Job. Here are 22 New Ones it Could Give You.
#FutureOfWork #HumanResources #WorkplaceTrends #AIJobs #CareerGrowth #LeadershipDevelopment #PeopleStrategy #CorporateLife #EmployeeExperience #WorkplaceCulture
Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and should not be considered professional advice. We are not responsible for any losses, damages, or liabilities that may arise from the use of this podcast. The views expressed in this podcast may not be those of the host or the management.
Thanks for listening!
Hey! We love new friends! Connect with us!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
And when the tools are democratized, value shits
for shits Value.
Does shit Value shits.
Speaker 2 (00:19):
Welcome to your work friends.
I'm Francesca and I'm Mel andwe're breaking down work, so you
get ahead back with new week,new headlines.
We haven't talked about thenews lately, Mel, but we got to
talk about the news we do.
We got to bring it back.
Speaker 1 (00:32):
There's a lot going on.
Yeah, yeah, we went to war thisweek.
Yeah, I'm literally gettingready to send out a newsletter
with a guide to help your teamthrough turbulent times.
Because what is this?
What is happening?
What is?
Speaker 2 (00:44):
this Once a week.
I ask what the fuck timelineare we living in?
Speaker 1 (00:48):
And it feels odd to talk about work stuff sometimes
when you have all these otherbig things happening.
So listen, if you're justlooking to listen to us for some
shits and gigs, we get it.
We're here for the laughsbecause you got to laugh through
it sometimes.
Speaker 2 (01:01):
You got to laugh through it, Mel.
I think we've got three topicsto talk about.
I have two.
What are you talking abouttoday?
Speaker 1 (01:07):
I am talking about an article out of the New York
Times 22 new jobs that AI couldgive you.
Speaker 2 (01:14):
That was one of my other ones.
Oh, it's so funny.
I love this.
But this is the spontaneity ofthis program is we don't know
what each other is going to talkabout.
Okay, so here's what I'mtalking about Should HR go away?
Last week, the CEO of Bolt,ryan Breslow, talked about
scrapping HR, and I want to talkabout is this a going trend,
and should HR die already?
Speaker 1 (01:40):
I'm happy to jump in with something optimistic, which
is job creation with AI GreatJumping in, all right.
According to a recent articleout of the New York Times called
22 New Jobs AI Could Give you.
According to the World EconomicForum and we know this, we've
talked about it their future ofjobs report, ai is expected to
displace 9 million jobs by 2030,but also create 11 million new
(02:03):
ones, which many of them don'texist yet.
These new roles are centeredaround where AI still needs us
most trust, integration andtaste, which was something funny
out of this article, so I can'twait to talk about that.
The so what?
Here we're not just looking atjob loss.
We're looking at a total jobtransformation.
Right, that's the headlines.
We're hearing that everywhere.
(02:24):
New roles like AI auditor,consistency coordinator,
escalation officer, an AIpersonality director which is
interesting and world designershighlight what makes us most
human, which is around ouraccountability, our storytelling
and surprise your style.
For those of us who have somestyle I'm not claiming I do that
(02:48):
might be one of your strengthsand your X factor.
Going forward, those things aregoing to get more valuable.
One of the stats out of thearticle noted that 70% of the
skills in the average job willhave changed by 2030.
That was by Anish Rahman,linkedin's chief economic
opportunity officer, and one ofmy favorite quotes from the
article was you aren't justbeing paid for the words that
you submit to AI, you're beingpaid to be responsible for them,
(03:09):
so I think that's a gooddistinction to make.
Something interesting that cameout of this was the AI taste
differentiator.
How do you feel about that?
What does that make you thinkof?
Speaker 2 (03:20):
I get it.
I get it.
One of the books I loved wasRick Rubin's a couple years ago
on talking about the idea ofcreativity and taste.
That's one of the places wherethat idea of discernment, of
editing, of creation is reallybe valuable.
Go on LinkedIn and see howeverybody is basically writing
(03:46):
with AI.
I'm not knocking that by anymeans.
I leverage AI as well.
Okay, but like you can tellpeople that are just copying and
pasting the AI verbatim and thepeople that actually have a
very deep point of view and avery crisp voice.
That is the difference betweentaste and just leveraging AI for
what it is and the people thatcan really pull out the voice
(04:08):
and pull out taste or maketrends happen, make voice happen
.
They get paid now.
They're going to get paid evenbigger money in the future.
Speaker 1 (04:17):
Yeah, look at Zuckerberg and his $100 million
AI salary jobs.
Yeah, so the taste role thatwe're talking about here refers
to a person whose main value istheir ability to make
judgment-based, creative oraesthetic decisions.
Right, so it's not just basedon your technical skills
everything you just saidintuition, insight, cultural
(04:39):
awareness.
These people aren't necessarilydoing the work, however,
they're directing the output,they're shaping the vision, they
know what good looks like.
We talk about this all the time, like you could be somebody who
does strategy in anorganization, but if you don't,
if you can't get to the heart ofit, you can't speak the voice
of your customer or your client.
You're not really using thetaste as an X factor.
(05:03):
So some of the roles that theytalked about were creative
director, without needing toactually touch the camera or
necessarily review things.
Brand strategists, withouthaving to make the decks.
Story designers.
World builders which isinteresting for your topic,
because they talked about worldbuilders as people in marketing,
gaming, even HR, who are worldbuilders for organizations.
(05:24):
And differentiator designer,who craft the feel of the
financial firm versus itscompetitors.
Right, why does this matter?
Because in a world where anyonecan prompt on chat, gpt, taste
becomes your differentiator andwhen the tools are democratized.
Value shifts from execution todiscernment, as you said, and
(05:48):
the challenge here, though, istaste is hard to measure but
really easy to fake.
There is a little bit of that,so you need your portfolio to
include your good decisions, notjust your good work.
So that's going to be adifference in how you even write
your resume or you think aboutthose stories that you tell in
interviews.
You need to start thinkingabout those things like how you
(06:10):
took something and made it as adifferentiator.
Organizations are going toprobably struggle for assessing
for taste, because that isdifferent.
It varies by person to person,but I could argue it all comes
down to the value that youbrought.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
You can demonstrate taste when you look at anybody
that's been in any kind ofvisual identity career.
Any of the arts have been inthis for a long time For a long
time, a long time.
So there are ways of evaluatingit.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
A hundred percent.
One of the unifying factors,though, around this taste role
is that they're all creativesteering roles.
So, listen, if you're acreative person who's been
slowly dying in corporate, now'syour time to shine, so tap into
that.
A couple other things thatstood out to me here was some of
the things that they called outfor folks to focus on, and
(07:05):
we've been talking about thisfor a long time.
Number one, front to front.
Here are the things you need tostart thinking about.
If you're a creative, or if youfeel like you don't have a
creative bone in your body, youneed to start like tapping into
what does creative mean for you?
Audit your human skills, likejudgment, ethics, storytelling,
cross-functional translations ofthose things.
That's going to be your edge.
Getting familiar with AI toolswe say this every day.
(07:27):
You don't have to build them,but you need to direct them, and
that's the other differentiator.
So we're not talking aboutstale prompts.
You need to make it your style,because something that others
don't have is your style when itcomes to prompting.
Rethink your entry points.
If AI is handling all the gruntwork, maybe your job starts at
(07:49):
the strategy table.
So start working on how to be astrategist and define your
taste.
So start working on how to be astrategist and define your
taste.
What is your taste?
What is your style?
To your good point.
This could be visual, thiscould be verbal, this could be
written.
But what is a point of viewthat AI can't fake?
Speaker 2 (08:06):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (08:07):
I'm excited.
I like the shift.
I think it's a good one.
Speaker 2 (08:13):
Yeah, I think this is where liberal arts majors are
really going to shine.
So the CEO of Bolt justannounced that he's getting rid
of HR Not downsizing, notrebranding, but flat out, no
more HR.
Instead, they are going intopeople operations.
Why?
Because, in his words, hr neverworked.
It's a little triggering, it'svery bold and it's part of a
(08:34):
growing movement around thiskind of I would say, a little
bit of a backlash around HR.
Are you seeing this, mel?
Speaker 1 (08:41):
Yes, I think my whole entire career I've heard this
message.
Having worked in the HR spacefor 20 plus years across
different areas of HR, I justthink a lot of people like to
blame HR when shit goes wrong.
I'm curious what he sees aspeople ops.
You and I talk about this often, how there's a compliance side
(09:02):
and there's people side, and thepeople side has gotten lighter
versus the compliance side, butit should be the other way
around.
This is the thing.
Speaker 2 (09:09):
Don't know what people operations means at Bolt,
but what we do know, to verygood point, is HR is typically
in two tracks.
Just to make this very overlysimple To Mel's very good point,
there's the legal andcompliance side.
So think of your anti-sexualharassment training, your I-9
forms or whatever, and yourbenefits and your pay.
That's the legal complianceside, making sure everybody's
(09:32):
getting paid, no one's sexuallyharassing each other we're all
legal beagle right.
Then there's this people sideof it, like your culture, your
learning and development, yourtalent management, your coaching
right Things that reallydevelop people and enable them
to thrive.
You're starting to see this kindof interesting schism between
the two and my gut is that withBolt they're basically saying we
(09:55):
don't need the people sideanymore.
We're just going to do thelegal and compliance side and
let the business figure out thepeople side, and I would argue
that's a pretty interesting take.
One of the things that I getreally nervous about when people
do that is basically coaching,management, development,
leadership development,development in general,
(10:18):
onboarding all this stuff thatwe know makes people really
thrive at work doesn't happenand it sure as hell doesn't
happen through the legaldepartment.
Speaker 1 (10:26):
No, and what we do know is that most people leave
within the first 90 days if theydon't even get a comprehensive
onboarding plan.
So if you're not offering, at aminimum, something like that,
you're going to lose people inthe first 90 days and it is
expensive to hire and it'sexpensive to lose.
Speaker 2 (10:44):
At minimum.
When you lose someone, it'sabout two times the cost of
someone's salary to replace themat minimum.
So, yes, that turnover getsvery expensive.
The reality of the situation isthe legal side of HR and the
people side of HR actually havecompletely different reasons for
being.
Legal and risk is protectiveprotective of the organization,
(11:07):
protective of the employee.
The people side is an enabler,it's an enablement organization
and, I would argue, sometimes iteven turns into a rev gen side
of the organization as well.
Absolutely, you have two verydifferent reasons for being, and
because of that I know I'mgoing to go out on a limb here,
but I'm actually a massive fanand have been a massive fan of
looking at splitting these twoorganizations.
(11:28):
Because, in order to have amore clear reason for being
right, because right now what'shappening is they're mushed
together, it gets very murky.
They have a ton of remits underthis umbrella, from onboarding
all the way up through makingsure that you filled out your
FAFSA, the correct way.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
If organizations want HR to work for them, they
should do the split 100% inagreement on that.
That comes down to also havinga seat at the table.
You're not reporting into theCFO or the CO.
You're reporting to the CEO,chros, cpos they should all
report into the CEO and have aseat at the table, and they
should have different budgets.
(12:09):
You and I know, because weworked in L&D.
You don't see shit becauseinstead the budget, to your good
point, is going to a workdayimplementation versus actually a
learning budget.
That is what helps people todevelop and support your
business goals and yourstrategies.
Speaker 2 (12:26):
The other thing in favor, in my mind, of splitting
these two organizations is theseare two very different domain
expertise.
When you have a legal andcompliance side of HR, these are
people that are incrediblyskilled at compensation on
benefits.
We have attorneys that arelooking at employment law right.
That's an incredibly differentdomain expertise than someone
that is architecting askills-based organization right.
(12:49):
This is totally differentdomains.
I have never been an HRBP in mylife period Like an HR business
partner, never dealt with it.
In fact, I'd get fired becauseI'd be like you did what.
I would absolutely not be ableto do it.
But people comment that I'm HRand I'm like I am an HR but I'm
not HRHR.
The way HR is Because we'retotally different domain
expertise.
(13:17):
Listen, best practice says splitthese two up and let these two
be their own domains, andespecially for a people strategy
side, when I'm talking aboutreally great people development
organizations, they're lookingat people strategy much like
they're looking at productstrategy and they're building
systems around like onboarding,coaching, manager development,
leadership development, feedbackloops.
They're not expecting one teamto be a therapist, an enforcer,
a coach, a strategist they'renot and so being able to really
(13:41):
let that engine flywheel happenfor what it is again totally
different skill, needs a totallydifferent budget and will be a
totally different enabler of theorg rather than a protector of
the org.
The other thing that just killsme on this, quite honestly, is
that AI is going to make thisconversation completely moot
anyway, given what you justtalked about with the New York
Times article too.
Right, yeah, we're going to seethese people sides of the
(14:03):
organization being worlddevelopers.
They're looking at what doesthe world of work look like for
employees working with AI agents.
That's going to be its ownecosystem.
No matter what, ai is alreadyaugmenting and sometimes
completely replacing more of thecompliance angles of HR.
I would argue you will stillneed people and strategists and
(14:24):
that compliance side of the HRbecause that is again a very
different domain expertise thatis absolutely fucking needed.
Speaker 1 (14:30):
It is, and I think, regardless if you're a CHRO or a
CPO, you're going to alwaysstraddle between these two areas
, because you need to understandthe full life cycle of an
employee experience, frompre-hire during post-hire.
What's that experience?
Look like You're touching allelements, but those teams can
operate separately whilesupporting each other, if that
(14:53):
makes sense.
Speaker 2 (14:54):
I mean, it's much like how product, product
marketing and sales worktogether too right, we're taking
different elements of the lifecycle, but they all have to be
the same consumer journey, thesame employer journey.
This drives a reallyinteresting conversation around
what could the future of HR looklike?
Speaker 1 (15:09):
Yeah, and employee experience teams can start to
get better budgets to makebetter workplaces.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
Yeah, and maybe the legal and compliance side too,
because they need some help aswell.
They need some help too.
Yeah, show them some love.
Speaker 1 (15:25):
This episode was produced, edited and all things
by us myself, mel Plett andFrancesca Ranieri.
Our music is by Pink Zebra andif you loved this conversation
and you want to contribute yourthoughts with us, please do.
You can visit us atyourworkfriendscom, but you can
(15:46):
also join us over on LinkedIn.
We have a LinkedIn communitypage and we have the TikToks and
Instagrams.
So please join us in thesocials and if you like this and
you've benefited from thisepisode and you think someone
else can benefit from thisepisode, please rate and
subscribe.
We'd really appreciate it.
That helps keep us going.
(16:06):
Take care, friends.
Bye friends, thank you.
And when the tools are democratized, value shits
for shits Value.
Does shit Value shits.
Speaker 2 (00:19):
Welcome to your work friends.
I'm Francesca and I'm Mel andwe're breaking down work, so you
get ahead back with new week,new headlines.
We haven't talked about thenews lately, Mel, but we got to
talk about the news we do.
We got to bring it back.
Speaker 1 (00:32):
There's a lot going on.
Yeah, yeah, we went to war thisweek.
Yeah, I'm literally gettingready to send out a newsletter
with a guide to help your teamthrough turbulent times.
Because what is this?
What is happening?
What is?
Speaker 2 (00:44):
this Once a week.
I ask what the fuck timelineare we living in?
Speaker 1 (00:48):
And it feels odd to talk about work stuff sometimes
when you have all these otherbig things happening.
So listen, if you're justlooking to listen to us for some
shits and gigs, we get it.
We're here for the laughsbecause you got to laugh through
it sometimes.
Speaker 2 (01:01):
You got to laugh through it, Mel.
I think we've got three topicsto talk about.
I have two.
What are you talking abouttoday?
Speaker 1 (01:07):
I am talking about an article out of the New York
Times 22 new jobs that AI couldgive you.
Speaker 2 (01:14):
That was one of my other ones.
Oh, it's so funny.
I love this.
But this is the spontaneity ofthis program is we don't know
what each other is going to talkabout.
Okay, so here's what I'mtalking about Should HR go away?
Last week, the CEO of Bolt,ryan Breslow, talked about
scrapping HR, and I want to talkabout is this a going trend,
and should HR die already?
Speaker 1 (01:40):
I'm happy to jump in with something optimistic, which
is job creation with AI GreatJumping in, all right.
According to a recent articleout of the New York Times called
22 New Jobs AI Could Give you.
According to the World EconomicForum and we know this, we've
talked about it their future ofjobs report, ai is expected to
displace 9 million jobs by 2030,but also create 11 million new
(02:03):
ones, which many of them don'texist yet.
These new roles are centeredaround where AI still needs us
most trust, integration andtaste, which was something funny
out of this article, so I can'twait to talk about that.
The so what?
Here we're not just looking atjob loss.
We're looking at a total jobtransformation.
Right, that's the headlines.
We're hearing that everywhere.
(02:24):
New roles like AI auditor,consistency coordinator,
escalation officer, an AIpersonality director which is
interesting and world designershighlight what makes us most
human, which is around ouraccountability, our storytelling
and surprise your style.
For those of us who have somestyle I'm not claiming I do that
(02:48):
might be one of your strengthsand your X factor.
Going forward, those things aregoing to get more valuable.
One of the stats out of thearticle noted that 70% of the
skills in the average job willhave changed by 2030.
That was by Anish Rahman,linkedin's chief economic
opportunity officer, and one ofmy favorite quotes from the
article was you aren't justbeing paid for the words that
you submit to AI, you're beingpaid to be responsible for them,
(03:09):
so I think that's a gooddistinction to make.
Something interesting that cameout of this was the AI taste
differentiator.
How do you feel about that?
What does that make you thinkof?
Speaker 2 (03:20):
I get it.
I get it.
One of the books I loved wasRick Rubin's a couple years ago
on talking about the idea ofcreativity and taste.
That's one of the places wherethat idea of discernment, of
editing, of creation is reallybe valuable.
Go on LinkedIn and see howeverybody is basically writing
(03:46):
with AI.
I'm not knocking that by anymeans.
I leverage AI as well.
Okay, but like you can tellpeople that are just copying and
pasting the AI verbatim and thepeople that actually have a
very deep point of view and avery crisp voice.
That is the difference betweentaste and just leveraging AI for
what it is and the people thatcan really pull out the voice
(04:08):
and pull out taste or maketrends happen, make voice happen
.
They get paid now.
They're going to get paid evenbigger money in the future.
Speaker 1 (04:17):
Yeah, look at Zuckerberg and his $100 million
AI salary jobs.
Yeah, so the taste role thatwe're talking about here refers
to a person whose main value istheir ability to make
judgment-based, creative oraesthetic decisions.
Right, so it's not just basedon your technical skills
everything you just saidintuition, insight, cultural
(04:39):
awareness.
These people aren't necessarilydoing the work, however,
they're directing the output,they're shaping the vision, they
know what good looks like.
We talk about this all the time, like you could be somebody who
does strategy in anorganization, but if you don't,
if you can't get to the heart ofit, you can't speak the voice
of your customer or your client.
You're not really using thetaste as an X factor.
(05:03):
So some of the roles that theytalked about were creative
director, without needing toactually touch the camera or
necessarily review things.
Brand strategists, withouthaving to make the decks.
Story designers.
World builders which isinteresting for your topic,
because they talked about worldbuilders as people in marketing,
gaming, even HR, who are worldbuilders for organizations.
(05:24):
And differentiator designer,who craft the feel of the
financial firm versus itscompetitors.
Right, why does this matter?
Because in a world where anyonecan prompt on chat, gpt, taste
becomes your differentiator andwhen the tools are democratized.
Value shifts from execution todiscernment, as you said, and
(05:48):
the challenge here, though, istaste is hard to measure but
really easy to fake.
There is a little bit of that,so you need your portfolio to
include your good decisions, notjust your good work.
So that's going to be adifference in how you even write
your resume or you think aboutthose stories that you tell in
interviews.
You need to start thinkingabout those things like how you
(06:10):
took something and made it as adifferentiator.
Organizations are going toprobably struggle for assessing
for taste, because that isdifferent.
It varies by person to person,but I could argue it all comes
down to the value that youbrought.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
You can demonstrate taste when you look at anybody
that's been in any kind ofvisual identity career.
Any of the arts have been inthis for a long time For a long
time, a long time.
So there are ways of evaluatingit.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
A hundred percent.
One of the unifying factors,though, around this taste role
is that they're all creativesteering roles.
So, listen, if you're acreative person who's been
slowly dying in corporate, now'syour time to shine, so tap into
that.
A couple other things thatstood out to me here was some of
the things that they called outfor folks to focus on, and
(07:05):
we've been talking about thisfor a long time.
Number one, front to front.
Here are the things you need tostart thinking about.
If you're a creative, or if youfeel like you don't have a
creative bone in your body, youneed to start like tapping into
what does creative mean for you?
Audit your human skills, likejudgment, ethics, storytelling,
cross-functional translations ofthose things.
That's going to be your edge.
Getting familiar with AI toolswe say this every day.
(07:27):
You don't have to build them,but you need to direct them, and
that's the other differentiator.
So we're not talking aboutstale prompts.
You need to make it your style,because something that others
don't have is your style when itcomes to prompting.
Rethink your entry points.
If AI is handling all the gruntwork, maybe your job starts at
(07:49):
the strategy table.
So start working on how to be astrategist and define your
taste.
So start working on how to be astrategist and define your
taste.
What is your taste?
What is your style?
To your good point.
This could be visual, thiscould be verbal, this could be
written.
But what is a point of viewthat AI can't fake?
Speaker 2 (08:06):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (08:07):
I'm excited.
I like the shift.
I think it's a good one.
Speaker 2 (08:13):
Yeah, I think this is where liberal arts majors are
really going to shine.
So the CEO of Bolt justannounced that he's getting rid
of HR Not downsizing, notrebranding, but flat out, no
more HR.
Instead, they are going intopeople operations.
Why?
Because, in his words, hr neverworked.
It's a little triggering, it'svery bold and it's part of a
(08:34):
growing movement around thiskind of I would say, a little
bit of a backlash around HR.
Are you seeing this, mel?
Speaker 1 (08:41):
Yes, I think my whole entire career I've heard this
message.
Having worked in the HR spacefor 20 plus years across
different areas of HR, I justthink a lot of people like to
blame HR when shit goes wrong.
I'm curious what he sees aspeople ops.
You and I talk about this often, how there's a compliance side
(09:02):
and there's people side, and thepeople side has gotten lighter
versus the compliance side, butit should be the other way
around.
This is the thing.
Speaker 2 (09:09):
Don't know what people operations means at Bolt,
but what we do know, to verygood point, is HR is typically
in two tracks.
Just to make this very overlysimple To Mel's very good point,
there's the legal andcompliance side.
So think of your anti-sexualharassment training, your I-9
forms or whatever, and yourbenefits and your pay.
That's the legal complianceside, making sure everybody's
(09:32):
getting paid, no one's sexuallyharassing each other we're all
legal beagle right.
Then there's this people sideof it, like your culture, your
learning and development, yourtalent management, your coaching
right Things that reallydevelop people and enable them
to thrive.
You're starting to see this kindof interesting schism between
the two and my gut is that withBolt they're basically saying we
(09:55):
don't need the people sideanymore.
We're just going to do thelegal and compliance side and
let the business figure out thepeople side, and I would argue
that's a pretty interesting take.
One of the things that I getreally nervous about when people
do that is basically coaching,management, development,
leadership development,development in general,
(10:18):
onboarding all this stuff thatwe know makes people really
thrive at work doesn't happenand it sure as hell doesn't
happen through the legaldepartment.
Speaker 1 (10:26):
No, and what we do know is that most people leave
within the first 90 days if theydon't even get a comprehensive
onboarding plan.
So if you're not offering, at aminimum, something like that,
you're going to lose people inthe first 90 days and it is
expensive to hire and it'sexpensive to lose.
Speaker 2 (10:44):
At minimum.
When you lose someone, it'sabout two times the cost of
someone's salary to replace themat minimum.
So, yes, that turnover getsvery expensive.
The reality of the situation isthe legal side of HR and the
people side of HR actually havecompletely different reasons for
being.
Legal and risk is protectiveprotective of the organization,
(11:07):
protective of the employee.
The people side is an enabler,it's an enablement organization
and, I would argue, sometimes iteven turns into a rev gen side
of the organization as well.
Absolutely, you have two verydifferent reasons for being, and
because of that I know I'mgoing to go out on a limb here,
but I'm actually a massive fanand have been a massive fan of
looking at splitting these twoorganizations.
(11:28):
Because, in order to have amore clear reason for being
right, because right now what'shappening is they're mushed
together, it gets very murky.
They have a ton of remits underthis umbrella, from onboarding
all the way up through makingsure that you filled out your
FAFSA, the correct way.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
If organizations want HR to work for them, they
should do the split 100% inagreement on that.
That comes down to also havinga seat at the table.
You're not reporting into theCFO or the CO.
You're reporting to the CEO,chros, cpos they should all
report into the CEO and have aseat at the table, and they
should have different budgets.
(12:09):
You and I know, because weworked in L&D.
You don't see shit becauseinstead the budget, to your good
point, is going to a workdayimplementation versus actually a
learning budget.
That is what helps people todevelop and support your
business goals and yourstrategies.
Speaker 2 (12:26):
The other thing in favor, in my mind, of splitting
these two organizations is theseare two very different domain
expertise.
When you have a legal andcompliance side of HR, these are
people that are incrediblyskilled at compensation on
benefits.
We have attorneys that arelooking at employment law right.
That's an incredibly differentdomain expertise than someone
that is architecting askills-based organization right.
(12:49):
This is totally differentdomains.
I have never been an HRBP in mylife period Like an HR business
partner, never dealt with it.
In fact, I'd get fired becauseI'd be like you did what.
I would absolutely not be ableto do it.
But people comment that I'm HRand I'm like I am an HR but I'm
not HRHR.
The way HR is Because we'retotally different domain
expertise.
(13:17):
Listen, best practice says splitthese two up and let these two
be their own domains, andespecially for a people strategy
side, when I'm talking aboutreally great people development
organizations, they're lookingat people strategy much like
they're looking at productstrategy and they're building
systems around like onboarding,coaching, manager development,
leadership development, feedbackloops.
They're not expecting one teamto be a therapist, an enforcer,
a coach, a strategist they'renot and so being able to really
(13:41):
let that engine flywheel happenfor what it is again totally
different skill, needs a totallydifferent budget and will be a
totally different enabler of theorg rather than a protector of
the org.
The other thing that just killsme on this, quite honestly, is
that AI is going to make thisconversation completely moot
anyway, given what you justtalked about with the New York
Times article too.
Right, yeah, we're going to seethese people sides of the
(14:03):
organization being worlddevelopers.
They're looking at what doesthe world of work look like for
employees working with AI agents.
That's going to be its ownecosystem.
No matter what, ai is alreadyaugmenting and sometimes
completely replacing more of thecompliance angles of HR.
I would argue you will stillneed people and strategists and
(14:24):
that compliance side of the HRbecause that is again a very
different domain expertise thatis absolutely fucking needed.
Speaker 1 (14:30):
It is, and I think, regardless if you're a CHRO or a
CPO, you're going to alwaysstraddle between these two areas
, because you need to understandthe full life cycle of an
employee experience, frompre-hire during post-hire.
What's that experience?
Look like You're touching allelements, but those teams can
operate separately whilesupporting each other, if that
(14:53):
makes sense.
Speaker 2 (14:54):
I mean, it's much like how product, product
marketing and sales worktogether too right, we're taking
different elements of the lifecycle, but they all have to be
the same consumer journey, thesame employer journey.
This drives a reallyinteresting conversation around
what could the future of HR looklike?
Speaker 1 (15:09):
Yeah, and employee experience teams can start to
get better budgets to makebetter workplaces.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
Yeah, and maybe the legal and compliance side too,
because they need some help aswell.
They need some help too.
Yeah, show them some love.
Speaker 1 (15:25):
This episode was produced, edited and all things
by us myself, mel Plett andFrancesca Ranieri.
Our music is by Pink Zebra andif you loved this conversation
and you want to contribute yourthoughts with us, please do.
You can visit us atyourworkfriendscom, but you can
(15:46):
also join us over on LinkedIn.
We have a LinkedIn communitypage and we have the TikToks and
Instagrams.
So please join us in thesocials and if you like this and
you've benefited from thisepisode and you think someone
else can benefit from thisepisode, please rate and
subscribe.
We'd really appreciate it.
That helps keep us going.
(16:06):
Take care, friends.
Bye friends, thank you.
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.