AI Will Not Fix Your Business Until You Rethink Work

Everyone is talking about AI productivity, but the reality inside large organisations is messier, slower and far more human. I sit down with Marion Devine, Principal Researcher in Human Capital at the Conference Board, to get past the hype and into what companies are actually doing with AI and generative AI, what’s working, and what’s quietly breaking. 

We dig into why CEOs are making big bets despite uncertain ROI, and why “everyone feels behind” even when it’s unclear who’s truly ahead. Marion shares what her research and interviews reveal about the readiness gap between leaders and workers, the mix of excitement and fear on the front line, and why AI can create new work just as easily as it removes grunt work. We also explore the uncomfortable truth that automating busywork is not the same as improving value, and that the hardest part of AI transformation is redesigning processes, decision making and culture. 

From psychological safety and middle manager pressure to ethical guardrails and the role of regulation, we look at what responsible AI governance really demands. We also tackle HR transformation, why curiosity and learning agility are being undervalued, and what happens to the early career ladder when entry level tasks disappear. If you care about the future of work, workforce skills, reskilling, and sustainable performance, this conversation offers a clear framework for asking better questions now. 

Subscribe, share the episode with a colleague, and leave a review if it helps you rethink your own AI strategy. What’s the one piece of work you think AI should never be allowed to replace?

Hear more from Marion at the Future of Work event on the 18th June in Brussels. www.future-of-work.eu

Find out more about the Future of Work -> www.future-of-work.eu

Transcript

Welcome And Guest Introduction

Marc Curtis 0:04

Welcome to the Pioneers Podcast by Lyreco. I'm Marc Curtis. Thank you so much again for joining me. A really interesting conversation today with Marion Devine. Marian has a long and distinguished career as a researcher specializing in subjects such as human capital and HR. She has co-authored and authored really a bewildering number of reports, books, and various other articles and research pieces. Absolutely fascinating person, I'm really looking forward to talking to her and a little bit intimidated because she really is really eminent in her field and she's done so much work recently thinking about the impact of AI, not only on the companies who have kind of adopted, but the people that are working for those companies as well. So without further ado, let's start my conversation with Marianne De Bee. Marianne, thank you so much for joining us on the Lyreco Pioneers podcast. Really lovely to see you again. I'm gonna give you I'm gonna try and do an introduction, but but if I'm completely honest, I'm a little intimidated by the the sheer amount of um stuff you've done over the last 30 years. But but the headlines are that you're a principal researcher in human capital for Europe at the Conference Board, and hopefully you can tell me a little bit more about the Conference Board as well in a second. Uh unbelievably, you've offered over 75 research reports or co-authored uh 75 research reports, mainly focusing on human capital trends, and I guess more recently as well, really getting into the AI conversation and what the impact is both for big companies but also from my perspective, more importantly, for the people that are working for those companies. And and prior to the conference board, you were a journalist and a business writer for the London Times, Sunday Times, um, and I think you've done some stuff uh I read somewhere for The Economist as well, or am I am I making that bit up?

Marion Devine 1:59

No, I've written four books for The Economist. I've I've written eight business books, but four were for the economists, which was a wonderful experience because everybody loves the economist. And so when you say we're writing for economists, they they say, Come and speak to me.

Marc Curtis 2:12

Yeah, unlike if you've written for the spectator, I suppose, in which case everybody kind of takes a little sharp intake of breath and steps away slowly. Um but but but that's that's a really good place to get into. So um, like I said, thank you so much for for taking the time today. And we've had a number of conversations before, and I always genuinely always really enjoyed chatting to you because I think some of the insights that you're coming out with are you know really fascinating. So maybe just start there. Um fill in the gaps a little bit about um who you are, what you do, and and also what the conference board are and what they do.

Marion Devine 2:42

Okay, thank you, Marc. It's great to be here. Um so I've um I've been with the conference board nearly 10 years. Before that, I was with Ashridge Holt. I think the the from a personal point of view, working for the conference board is is a huge privilege and delight because we convene um C-suite executives and sort of one level down in in councils regularly through the year. We're a think tank, so we're membership-based, we're impartial, independent. But the thing that I love most about my job is that we we have trusting relationships with our with our members, and we operate under Chatham House rule, so it's vendor-free. So when we go and talk and when we do research for them and with them, you really get the full story. It's behind closed doors and it's a trusting relationship. So I think that that really informs our insights. Um, so we're based in Manhattan, but we're all over the world, in Asia, in Europe, Canada, the US, um, the Gulf, and uh we have various different centres. I'm in the human capital one, but we're also in economics, governance, um, and finance and sustainability. So um a great spread, and and that's what we try to do to really connect the dots, really, to to and and you're attached and you're attached to the Brussels uh the Brussels. I'm attached to yes, Conference Board Europe. Uh but I still in some of our our research projects I can work with my Asian and um US colleagues. So sometimes it's very regional what I look at, and other times it's global. And actually, many of these topics are global. But we we're led by our multinational companies. We um the multinational companies that belong to us and subscribe to us are big multinational companies, a billion plus revenues. So they're big companies, um, a lot of them Fortune 500 companies, so so that's where I'm coming from in terms of my perspective and and the work that we do.

Marc Curtis 4:40

So so I guess I mean that's probably a good place to start, and and I should say that you shared with me um uh a report that that that um you've worked on uh recently with the conference board all about AI transformation um in in in in big businesses, and and I've got a number of questions on that, but uh but I guess taking a step back, given the fact that a lot of the work you do is stimulated by discussions and the needs of of these big companies that you're working for, I mean I guess the answer's sort of obvious, but but what what do those companies perceive as being the biggest uh question that they have or the biggest opportunity that they have that they're struggling with at the moment?

Marion Devine 5:18

Yeah. Well, I I mean I think I can take it from the top in terms of uh every year we do a C-suite outlook where we we um survey uh something like one and a half thousand C-suite executives and probably about six hundred are CEOs. So I can sort of say, grounded in our data and what we're seeing, our companies are I think they're very aware of of the huge sweeps that are being made in AI and Gen AI. There are they see it as an opportunity and a challenge. An opportunity, CEOs definitely see it as a as a possibility for improved productivity, improved profitability. Um they're making very big investments in it. They're worried because they don't know about the ROI and nobody can quite figure that out. But they also see it as a challenge because of the whole problem about building capability skill shortages. So that's so they're you know they're looking to it, so they have high expectations, and I suppose that the the their teams working for them are tasked with trying to make this happen. And as you mentioned in the beginning, there is a very big gap between what the real experience of companies and where they are, and what some of the kind of maybe the providers, some of the consultancies are saying, and suggesting it's a lot more advanced than it is, but actually, you know, it's it's there's a lot of trial and error going on, and you know, fear, trepidation, and excitement and optimism.

Productivity Promises And Hard ROI

Marc Curtis 6:42

I guess, I guess, I mean there's there's there's a lot to unpack even in that little bit there. I mean, to on the one hand, what you're saying is that there is a gap between potentially the story that's being told by these big consultancies and probably the companies who are promoting these things, and actually what's happening on the ground. So that so there's a gap there. Um there's probably a fear from CEOs and from senior management that that somehow everybody else is doing it better. Definitely. Which which I think uh is probably true for almost everything in in life, but but certainly it seems to be true for for for the AI conversation. I I'm also very interested in the fact that you said at the top that they're framing it in terms of an opportunity for productivity and efficiency and and and rapid and business growth, yeah. So just on those on those topics, I mean, do you think that's the right framing? Because what I've seen recently is a lot of the companies who are really pushing AI, sp certainly things like Anthropic and even Microsoft to a certain extent, are kind of stepping back a little bit from the productivity and efficiency side of stuff and r almost trying to retell the story from a human creativity augmentation perspective, you know. And I'm not sure whether that's because the efficiency stuff never materialized or whether they they just realized that they had to tell a different story because it wasn't meshing properly.

Speaker 8:05

I think that's a really good comment question and insight, Mark. Um I think I think that that you know it's rapidly evolving, and and and I and I'm amazed at how how things differ from say even three months ago. So I've had now conversations with a good 35 interviews plus the data and the surveys that we've been doing. So number one, you're absolutely right, companies, everyone, everyone in the interviews when we speak to them thinks they're behind. So but they also say, well, who are these people in front? Um who are they? Uh we still don't know really. So that's the first thing. And I think but I think as companies are experimenting, the the productivity and efficiency gains are are there, but they're very hard to um to demonstrate and to prove. And in some ways, when you start using AI and Gen AI, it creates new work, or if you're using it poorly, it can actually slow you down. So there's a lot of experimentation going on about what does it mean to use it in a way that makes sense, that does enhance you know basic efficiency. But but yes, the narrative is shifting to brings out the very best in people. There's a lot of concern about how if we use it badly, it will, you know, degenerate thinking, decision-making, you know, all that critical thinking. And I think companies are definitely really starting to grapple with this. This to me, in a way, is is a very current issue. How do we use it in a way that it is an assistant, it enhances our thinking? And and definitely I've heard a few times the bottleneck is imagination. That's the bottleneck. The technology is there, the investment is there, but it's the people side that that we really need to sort out. And we and I think as well, there's this thinking the time is now, I think, for the debates about what do we actually want? You know, how do we want work to evolve? How do we want organisations to evolve? I think it's important to have that debate, even if it's closed behind closed doors. But otherwise, you know, we're we're rocketing along. Um, yeah, and I think we need to think about it.

Marc Curtis 10:10

But but it it's interesting you should say that the creativity becomes a bottleneck, and and I suppose the cynic in me would say that sounds an awful lot like the same things that other tech platform providers often say to absolve themselves of any of the problems that might be associated with the technology they're providing. I mean, typically famously, obviously, you've got Facebook saying that that they're not they're not responsible for any of the content that they produce, they're just a platform, they're just a sharing platform. And and and what you're saying is that actually the narrative that's coming from some of the AI tool providers and platform providers is it's like, well, I don't know, you know, you you guys just need to work out how to use it properly. You know, we we've given you the tools, but ultimately it's on it's on the human beings to work out how to use them effectively. Or am I or am I putting words in your mouth now? Am I am I misrepresenting what you said?

Speaker 11:03

I I think the truth is somewhere in the middle, as always. I think I think that the the technology firms cannot absolve themselves of responsibility. Absolutely not. I think there needs to be a very close partnership, and some of the companies that that that that we have as members are having that close partnership. You know, they're one of the they they um are a sort of preferred you know company and vendor thing and and and discussing. On the other hand, companies do need to work out how best to use it. But I think you know at the moment we're we our first phase of our our uh uh uh exploration was about how our companies evolve and what's actually happening in terms of processes, structures, strategy, and and workers. We're looking at how our companies building workforce capability. Um and and I think that you know part of the problem is is is uh the foundational a what they're calling AI literacy and AI fluency has to be there before people can be equipped to then start making some some of those much more thoughtful processes. So there's a sort of or decision. So there's a sort of gap, I think, for companies in terms of, yeah, we've got the swanky tools, but how do we very quickly develop the skills and the sophistication to think about how we use them in a way that is responsible and meaningful and aligns with our priorities and and also our purpose as business.

Leaders Confident Workers Uneasy

Marc Curtis 12:26

So I mean that was that was that was really interesting from the data because you were saying that I think in it one of the stats is 60% of leaders say that they they're confident or very confident about their leadership's AI readiness, and yet the opposite is almost true for the actual workers themselves, and and they they they don't feel particularly well prepared or they've they've got fears around how it's going to be implemented.

Speaker 1 12:47

Yeah.

Marc Curtis 12:48

W I mean w what do you think is the the reason for the gap? And and and and what are the what what should companies be thinking about if they want to close that gap? Uh is it the leaders who are overconfident or the workers who are over scared or underprepared?

Speaker 13:03

I think it's reflecting some of where some of the resources in terms of knowledge building and skills building is going. I think companies are prioritizing in a lot of cases their leaders. They they I think they recognise that their very top senior leaders really need some time and space away to really get their heads around this and a safe place. Um you know, so when we've I've just done about uh 12, 13 interviews with with our multinational companies about skilling, and most of them have some sort of uh offering to their leadership to help them build those skills, also to think about it strategically, how it might benefit the business, big emphasis on commercial opportunities, and of course that's also where the investment goes within the company, it goes into the projects that they think can really deliver value or you know um bring better more revenue or new revenue. Um, I think that your average employer employees is maybe not getting those opportunities, and certainly blue-collar workers or frontline workers that are are really quite difficult. So I think there is a gap. I think that workers are uh anxious, it's a real combination of anxiety and excitement. Um it really depends on who you ask, I think. But I think leaders are just in that slightly more privileged position of having had more support.

Marc Curtis 14:26

Yeah, I yeah, I I think I think it would be um probably disingenuous for me to say that that hasn't been my experience as well. I what's interesting though is that that I you know, and I'm hoping I'm not misquoting the the statistics, but I think one of the other numbers that came out of your report was that 91% of workers said that AI has had some kind of impact in their daily work. So on the one hand, you've got workers who are saying we're not being educated, we're not being given the tools and resources, and yet almost all of them recognise that AI is having an impact. And and a a large proportion are also saying that as a result their their satisfaction in the job that they do is also going up as well. So what what's is is it a perception challenge then, or or you know, why is there this disparity between one set of sort of feedbacks from the workers and and and the other?

Speaker 15:19

Well, I think one is to do with the question is around their day-to-day experience, and the other is the question that we asked about what they where they think this is going. So I think that when people look a little bit down the road, they they do wonder is AI coming for me? Is AI coming for my job? Now at the moment it seems that a lot of the experimentation and and adoption is at the sort of task level, you know. So people are if you and me um we're experimenting with AI, we're using it to to help us do jobs that perhaps we find difficult or or are boring, you know, uh people talk about the grunt work. So so I think that that's sort of where it is. So people at the day-to-day level and their tasks are using it and thinking, oh, you know, we're quite good. Um but when they think ahead, they think, where is this going and you know, is it going to be able to replace me? So that's I think that explains it.

Busywork Value And Better Use Cases

Marc Curtis 16:10

That's a re Yeah, that's a really interesting insight. Really interesting. And I I was I was I I wrote about it recently actually, that I was suddenly struck by the fact that I I I see a lot of people using AI exactly as you said, at a kind of a a worker level, to do I would argue not even the boring and the grunt work, but actually the work that doesn't really give any value anyway. So that that there is a culture, if we're honest, there is a culture of busy work in in in the office world, in in in business world, where people are spending time creating presentations or reports or whatever. Now they can get AI to do it quicker. The question that I I posed around that was should we be using AI to do that or should we be taking a more fundamental look at the culture that that that's built up around creating this content? Because if if nobody was reading it before, they're certainly not going to read it now because because you can actually get AI to read it. So so are we just using AI to create content for other AI to look at to satisfy a workplace culture around report writing or busy work?

Speaker 17:16

Well, I mean, that is our argument in in the work that we did that to really harness uh AI, gen AI, companies need to really rethink the fundamentals. Now, I don't see many signs of companies doing that because there are they are all at this experiment experimentation stage. There is uh there's definitely we're we're at the we're sort of on the cusp of now, they're starting to certainly from the companies we've talked to, they're starting to make the big bets. They're starting to say, okay, this is the project, these are the use cases we're gonna go with. But we don't see so far many um companies fundamentally rethinking how they work, the processes, the structures. I think it will come, but it takes a bit of courage, really. I was interested, um, one of the companies, I I have a great privilege when I do a piece of work, I then go round to our councils and present and then have further conversations, and and often they they then as well share what they're doing. And and I've been to our our heads of HR operations, heads of inclusion, heads of talent acquisition, our CHROs. So sort of multiple perspectives. And one company that I I um I spoke to recently, I was fascinated that they were doing, they've started um a workshop with one particular cohort of workers. They brought them together with two questions, which was to say, you know, what do you think will be AI impact on your whole area of work, your role, and how can we accelerate AI adoption? And they've identified some future critical skills. Um, so the conversations around these skills, but basically they sat them down, the team of 30, to really talk about where they thought their role, their um cluster of skills was going, and they brought in some external experts as well. Now, so that maybe that's going on a little bit more, but I think it's fundamental, and and I think that you know, the end-to-end, let's look at these tasks, and and you know, you've got to think in terms of value, value creation. What are you actually doing, and ultimately how does it translate into your marketplace? So that's really, really important, I think.

Marc Curtis 19:22

Yeah, and you you you speak about in the report the the need for a bottom-up approach, sort of meeting in the middle with the with the strategic ambitions, and I guess that's what you're talking about, is that companies need to not just think in terms of a strategy of okay, where can we create efficiencies or where can we multiply or or accelerate our existing activities, is actually taking a a more even a higher level approach and saying, okay, what does AI change for us as a company? How does it change our relationship with the market or customers or the way we do business, and then turn that into a into a strategic strategic ambition, because I'm swallowing my words, strategic ambition that that enables you to to to radically rethink how we do the work rather than just trying to bolt on this tool to do what we do already, right?

Strategy Guardrails And Ethical Governance

Speaker 20:11

That absolutely, and this is where you know I think for let's call it governance uh or this strategic framework, it has to be at several levels, and as you said, bottom, top down, and bottom-up. And I think it's really essential for the very senior most um uh executives to actually think of what is their strategy, um, what do they want from AI? And and I think that what's the most important, one one interviewer said to me it's not AI for AI's sake or Gen AI for AI's sake, it's for the business, it's for our business priorities, what will drive us forward. So I think trying to frame it in that way and avoiding this thing of being very tech-led, which has definitely been happening. And it's you know, the the whole technology of and the data, and you know, that it can really swallow up the energy about how you put in these systems. So I think it's really important for the the the top team to to create this framework, a sense of what is it we actually want to achieve. It's really important to have governance in terms of ethical use, you know, guardrails, um, how we use it, um what's acceptable, what isn't. Some companies are using the EU AI AI regulation to actually give that conversation a bit of structure.

Marc Curtis 21:26

A bit of a you you you you you talk about psychological safety as well, and specifically the fact that we're entering to a we're entering into a kind of a a period where we're being asked or we're asking people to experiment and you know fail fast and do all this kind of stuff, you know, which you know, to understand where AI fits or whatever. And and and as a side note, I mean I'm quite struck actually by the fact that as an as a as an innovation person, expert, whatever, we always tell people don't don't come with a solution looking for a problem. It has to start with a problem which which is slightly being twisted around with AI because we've been given uh you know a an everything solution and then told to work out what the problems are. But how are how are organizations going to navigate this psychological safety issue when with the best will in the world most companies still punish failure rather than embrace embrace failure and the learning opportunities in there, irrespective of what they say. And I think you know we we've we you and I probably both know enough corporations who who say one thing and actually have a very different culture when it comes to failure. I mean how do we square that when when when when failure is inherent in in AR we're still at that stage where everything's going to fail really.

Psychological Safety For Experimentation

Speaker 22:42

Yeah. I think you're right it's a huge it is a mindset change. It's a big cultural change. Some companies I think might be further along the road if they for example have um gone into agile a lot maybe if they've got some agile parts of the organisation that use agile methodologies. I think it helps if companies have also gone down the skills route and and they've started you know having sort of their integrated you know their internal skills marketplace done a lot of work on that and I think that that creates a um if it's working well which it isn't always it creates a new type conversation with people about their skills about what what the gaps are where they want to go but the thing is it's got to be I think I've seen um one or two um notices about companies putting into their sort of uh performance evaluation you must be using AI and you must be demonstrating to us so one company spoke to recently I think they 20% of the the the target was around AI and you must be demonstrating that you're you're building something. I have great doubts about making it mandatory because I I think it will take away the psychological safety. I think there is something about needing to really encourage people and sometimes perhaps push them a little bit and so sometimes maybe some of the training and development could be mandatory you know possibly but I think if you're going to start connecting it to performance management you have to be very very careful. And I think as well psychological safety it will come down to your middle managers um your your operational managers and and something that we're seeing in this current stage of research is a few companies saying actually we've rather overlooked our middle managers and our you know those people at the sort of supervisory sort of level.

Marc Curtis 24:36

And and they're just as scared as everybody else right because because they've got the same you know arguably the same if not worse challenges which is they're seeing people that their reports who are beginning to use AI and and therefore they're having to become better at understanding when it's being used effectively or or or appropriately but they're also getting pressure from the senior management in the business to say what are you doing to support your people so it's it's I mean so often is the case middle management is often the problem because middle managements are terrified about change but also have to be seen to be embracing stuff you know and they're being pulled in in different directions.

Speaker 25:14

And I think it's also there's a there's a thing about knowledge workers and experts and you know AI uh genai democratizes knowledge very hard. So all that all that knowledge that that some of these senior people have suddenly it's very accessible. So so I think experts and knowledge workers are having to rethink how to bring value and that's that's a tough challenge. I think a lot of people are probably wrestling with that individually I think it would be good for companies to create the conditions where people could could talk about it more openly and about you know what they can do.

Marc Curtis 25:52

I I had exactly this conversation recently actually so we we we we were talking about we were discussing running a running a a survey internally to to understand where processes can be improved and pain points can be navigated and frictions can be lessened and historically and I and I hope I hope my my my company won't mind me saying this historically when we've asked for this kind of information typically people come back with oh you know the heating's not very good or there's too much noise you know they don't think about the actual work that they're doing because actually um and I apologise for this digression but but what what I found is that people who've spent years learning how to use a a an inefficient or broken system that then gives them value in the company. They become the keep the keepers of the magic right so if you then introduce a a a tool that in in in an instant removes the special value that they were able to provide because they were the gatekeepers that's terrifying right so so people don't don't necessarily want to give up they don't want to see their financial invoicing system improve because they know because they're the ones who know how to navigate it. And I guess that's going to be the same in lots of different areas right?

Speaker 27:07

I think it is and uh you know there's no quick and easy solution but I think something about openness something about a a a genuinely supportive culture um you know I mean something we're doing another piece of work on culture actually and one of the um questions is about you know how how uh can you speak out with ideas. Right. And workers were so this was the US workers say yeah we can do that but when a question about can you challenge things you know can you actually bring you know where behaviour is not in keeping with stated values no so it's like so so I think when it comes to challenging something so for example if you have a situation where you did fail on something you were experimenting and it hasn't gone down very well people are do not necessarily feel they can say hang on a second this we're we're talking about experimentation. We're talking about you know trying out things and and you know they don't feel safe to do that.

Middle Managers Under Real Pressure

Marc Curtis 28:08

So nobody nobody wants to be reminded of the the the the promise that they made do they? I mean it's a bit like being a parent when your child tells you to put your phone away. Yes. It's like you you you have to you have to live by the same rules. I I'm also struck by you know just just something you said a little bit earlier about companies who've already embraced agile um and how potentially that can be easier but but again the thought that I had with that is that that takes you back to an IT led experimentation culture because largely speaking agile is always going to be associated with uh not always but but quite often involves IT infrastructure project projects. The challenge is then how do you translate that agile methodology to sales for example or to logistics where the the emphasis for those people has always been on you get it right first time otherwise you you did you know you lose your job basically because it because failure is not tolerated in those situations. And I guess that's the cultural hump that has to be sort of navigated right?

Speaker 29:09

Yeah well I mean we did again I did a report um I think about three years ago about agile and and and how HR was was the people function was sort of dealing with it. And what I've seen now for for a while especially during COVID when people a lot of companies embraced agile because they had to work so fast and and you know sort of crisis what I've seen now is that that I don't see our big organizations saying we want to be fully agile but they certainly have have moved in terms of working out where agile can work but as you say there are some functions where it's got to be right especially if it's got a regulatory facing sort of activity. And there is this thing about you know so I think what companies have learnt is that yes this has come from IT but it has to be um it has to go with a cultural shift and it has to be applied in in a context where people do understand it and can work and do it.

HR Transformation And Missing Skills

Marc Curtis 30:07

So so certainly um I remember one HR leader saying to me we've figured out that actually what we need to do is we can get agile coaches but what we need to do is get other people and teach them agile particularly you know people HR people and also teach leaders you know managers what they need to do to make agile work because just as a technology it will fall flat on its face or sorry as a process so it's got to be accompanied with a cultural shift and and an understanding of you know working in new ways collaborating in new ways so so you know I think some learning has been done there and and you know um we'll see really you you I mean you talk you talk about HR and that probably brings me on to the next sort of big takeout from from from your writings is that you make the case that HR needs to transform that they're they're they're not you know they they identify themselves as not being you know comfortable with their own operating models or or or how it can fit this new this sudden imposition of a new reality what sort of transformation do you think HR actually needs to to embrace? Where do they start? And also what's stopping most HR functions from actually making that step or or taking the first steps?

Speaker 31:29

Well a good a good six months ago I uh conducted a survey among in the end it was 70 of our own member companies so these are some some of Europe's biggest companies about HR transformation HR effectives only five percent of those 70 companies felt they had a highly effective HR sort of operating model and most were in the middle but what really struck me was I've done this survey now for sort of three four times there's been very little change that the middle ones have improved a little bit but what what I've sort of found was that that that um they are thinking about evolution so when I asked a question about are you thinking about radical change or is it sort of evolving and finessing that's what they're doing. And I think that's a problem because I think the technology is moving so fast and the opportunities to to use GNAA across people processes are huge that that just evolving the structures is is probably not good enough and come they they're looking to technology they're looking to um you know all these things I had a question about what were the most important skills for HR leaders and you know what at the top it was all about the strategic partnership uh stakeholder management influencing down the bottom the lowest priorities for them was curiosity tech savviness um learning agility and those are the very things that that the people function really needs in this current environment um so so I think and I think if they want to be a credible partner with the business because the business does want the people function involved because they are recognizing there's cultural shifts there's there's upskilling you know there's there's there's definitely a a strong remit for the people function but if they're struggling if they are uh you know a backwater in an organisation that's that's not going to help them in any way so so I but that but that but that's really striking though isn't it and I think it was what six percent um ranked curiosity as an important skill which is you know effectively within the margin of error for for nothing.

Marc Curtis 33:29

So and and and I rank curiosity as being certainly in the bit of the the the business world that I operate in as being the most important skill absolutely and it's the most important thing that I want to encourage my my kids to engage you know I think everything else can be learned but if you don't have a baseline curiosity but but I was really struck by that and I and I'm and I'm kind of sitting there thinking okay so why why don't HR is it because they feel that their their their skill set or their their remit is is a monolith it doesn't need to be changed and actually it's just the tools that change or I mean what where do you even start with that?

Speaker 34:05

Well I think I think practically speaking I think organisations have not invested enough in the HR function for capability building for skilling and and all the rest of it and and giving HR headspace to think about how they need to evolve themselves so I think that's one thing. I think and and this sort of problem that HR is is often regarded as a sort of a cost centre. So that's so there's a lot of legacy stuff about the maturity of the HR function and and its regard how how it's regarded and perceived in in the organisation. So I think that's one thing but definitely um it's it's the thing that's plagued the peak of function is bureaucracy you know getting bogged down in in low value tasks and and really finding it hard to be the strategic partner. I was really struck though when I went to our HR operations council now this is a council of um quite a few global but also European heads of operations and and what I found really striking was they see themselves as very much the innovator because they they have been dealing with HR technology sooner probably than other parts of the function they've been in building it in self-service and you know and and and various different tools they've been working out the integration and they also more and more they they are architecting processes and they they have responsibility end to end. Now one company that hosted this meeting were actually saying talking about how they had worked with IT and the finance department I think to say you know we don't just want a people sort of platform we want something that is for all the business support functions. So they've actually been creating this a one-stop um system that's also IT finance and that's quite radical that's quite new it's hard so I think that you know HR can change but perhaps they just need to kind of really work out who's got the energy to do it who's in the best place to do it and maybe bring in some external skills as well.

Marc Curtis 36:18

And actually sorry I was just going to say because I've now been uh interviewing uh global heads of learning I think they ask their perspective as well is is across the organisation they're working different parts of the business about their skills need so I think again they they could be quite dynamic uh in terms of leading change within the function no I I I completely agree I mean I and I think I I think some of it probably stems if I can read between the lines a little bit of what what the remit of HR is initially anyway because if if your HR department is effectively there as a an organizational throughput machine to protect the business from problems and to make sure that you've got people coming into the business then they're kind of sort of bogged down as they're kind of like a funnel rather than than having a a more strategic view. I think going back to what you said right at the top about the need for businesses to really understand what they want to do with HR uh sorry with with AI clearly there's a need for the human capital part of that to be embedded in it. It's and it's less of an HR conversation and more about what what do we want to do with our people and then how do we enable HR or people in culture or whatever you want to call it to achieve those ambitions. And then maybe that maybe that flips the emphasis a little bit and and gives them the freedom they need. I think L and D as well if it's part of the HR function then L and D tends to have a l a slightly softer approach to the people in a business right because they're there literally to support them rather than sometimes this slightly conflicting relationship that you have with traditional HR which is you you know you you keep them at arm's length and don't and you know and don't you know don't poke them too much in case the you know in case the the eye of a Saul Ron kind of starts to focus on your department.

Entry Level Jobs And The Broken Rung

Speaker 38:07

I think something that's encouraging is is that more and more we know from our uh benchmarking uh governance benchmarking we know that more and more companies big companies have CHROs on the board but not only that when we did a project with them last year and and some really interesting data they are also working CHROs are working increasingly with CEOs on kind of that you know the people culture talent so CEOs are really taking that um as a very important part of their role working closely with the CHROs and we also found that in some really forward looking companies the CHRO is going to the um the supervisory boards the subcommittees because they are asking questions as well particularly around talent and skills so I think that that that is a very encouraging development because I think if it's coming from the top and beyond this you know the executive committee but from the supervisory board as well that the recognition of how important it is for competitiveness for you know talent you know that that might give um some people functions you know new momentum and and maybe more confidence to build the business case for more investment in in the function itself. Yeah.

Marc Curtis 39:22

And and and and I mean it's it sort of links a little bit to what I think you've written about with the early career and the broken rung on the career ladder. It feels like that that businesses also need to have a a perspective and a strategy around people coming into the business as well, right? Because and and and again this is something I've I've I've written about and and sort of been very interested in is this that the first casualties of of the AI uh revolution is is to remove the graduates and the interns and the and the kind of the entry level jobs the the the the doing your time part of working in a business where you learn the ropes by doing the the mundane repetitive and sometimes boring tasks.

Speaker 1 40:06

Yeah.

Marc Curtis 40:06

What what's what's that going to do for us and and and again what's the fix? What what what should we be thinking about now? How should we be changing?

Speaker 40:15

Well I think I think uh it's really important to be aware and there are some great studies and statistics coming out around um you know recruitment trends and everything and and the UK is particularly uh problematic in terms of graduate unemployment so the UK it's not quite uniform across Europe but I think it's about uh really building awareness and really get helping companies to say look if you are knocking out the first part of the talent pipeline this is problematic but also you are potentially losing out on the very people who maybe have a lot of digital savvy maybe um but who have that energy that fresh thinking so this is bad um full stop but I think they have to companies probably have to rethink what does it mean to have an entry um role and and maybe rethink onboarding I think onboarding really needs to change to um onboarding maybe a whole year in terms of helping people you know maybe rotating a bit like graduate programs maybe rotating around the business using coaching using mentoring work shadowing um formal education and and and I think some of I was interested to see Siemens has completely revamped its um its uh apprenticeship scheme and is and it's incorporated AI skills and all sorts of things and so I think it's being willing to take longer uh think rethinking about what is an entry um level job rethinking on boarding and that first sort of um uh you know phase of of the career because if they don't do it we will have a broken ladder and and that is a big big problem um you know and and sort of when it comes to all the recruitment especially around AI skills and everything the bulge is is in the middle it's it's people further on um people who maybe have the skills or couldn't easily fairly easily be trained in them so I think we really need to to think about that.

Marc Curtis 42:13

Well it's this whole shift from to a diamond shaped organisation isn't it from a from a pyramid organisation. I I guess the challenge there then is that you've almost got to create an artificial environment for new for new hires where you're you're you're deliberately I don't want to use the word dumbing down but deliberately providing them with with work that could easily be done by automated systems or AI just to expose them to parts of the business to get that organizational knowledge into the into the pipeline.

Speaker 42:46

I I don't know if it's it's the doing the the dumb jobs but I think from my conversations companies it's more thinking about projects and tasks that teach about context you know so it's not the task in itself but it's understanding the context and understanding all those things that gradually we all acquire but it takes time but I I also think if you if you really thought about it sort of you could be thinking you know these people okay maybe for a year they're a resource maybe we could put them onto special projects maybe we could ask them to look at something that's very established and and rethink it. You know kind of just just be creative with maybe what how how you employ them in that time but it does require obviously accepting that that they may not you know be bringing back the ROI in quite the way you want.

Marc Curtis 43:41

But if it's a longer bet, right? It's a longer bet it's a it's a longer term bet. And I and I guess I mean what you're hinting at there is is it's about trying to trying to systematize the the the curiosity back into into the entry level of a company. Because what you want is people who come in and look around and go, well This could be done differently, or this could be, you know, why are we doing this? Why are we? Yeah, exactly. Yeah, I think I think asking that fundamental question, and it uh you know, maybe that's the opportunity for HR, just going back to the HR um, you know, models, is that clearly HR people are or or you know, human resource people are thinking about how it works in a business, but they also need to apply it to their own to their own ways of thinking as well, you know, bringing on HR professionals and and trying to engender that same sense of why are we doing this? You know, I should be asking questions, can we change it?

Speaker 44:34

Yeah, yeah, absolutely. And and you know, HR has its own grappling with sort of um, you know, is it is it T-shape, how much sort of specialized functional knowledge do you need, you know, as a as a HR specialist, how much do you need the the more transversal business acumen and you know um financial understanding, etc. So and and you know that the whole whole HR sort of structure is changing, companies are changing how they are doing shared services and what the roles are there, it's changing how a hey HR ops is working, they're rethinking about the role of the HR business partner. So, you know, there's there is a lot of changes going on in that, and and part of it is about how do we yeah, how do we develop new um new talent.

Marc Curtis 45:19

And it and it's it's rather unfortunate in a way that the whole conversation seems to be, you know, and I'm guilty of this as much as anybody, but framed around AI. But actually, it's not about AI really in this instance, it's it's it's about business evolution. AI just happens to be the technology that has captured all the headlines and is making, you know, making the bold kind of claims, and if you're on LinkedIn, you know, rapidly becoming unreadable LinkedIn, not least because of all the AI on it, but but but if it's not AI, it's people talking about layoffs or you know big headlines saying if you if your team aren't doing this, then you need to get rid of them and all this kind of stuff. And and I guess that creates a a general feeling of fear and fear and anxiety, right? It's it's it's it's creating this atmosphere and and it's potentially nowhere near the reality of what's happening on the ground, which goes back again to this whole thing that companies think that everybody, every other company is doing it better than them.

unknown 46:15

Yeah.

Speaker 46:15

And I think it brings us back to you know this this thing about being purpose-led. Now, you know, there's a lot of talk about it and the cynicism about it and everything, but but honestly, when I've talked to some companies that have a very, really strong purpose, and and perhaps it might be some of the you know a pharmaceutical company, but I I just think that that in this time of huge change and and the technology evolving so fast because nobody can keep up with it, that companies absolutely have to go back to the basics about why are we doing what we do and and and inform, you know. Um you just have to, why are we out here? Um, what are we trying to do for our customers? Is this technology, is this way of working, helping or hindering? It's it's really going back to value creation, understanding how you're creating value all the way through the organization. And you know, I've been very struck. There's one pharmaceutical company, they're keeping very quiet about it, but they have completely abandoned the traditional um uh structure of sort of you know drug creation, da da da. And they have uh identified their value streams and they've they've reorganized people into value stream teams to really try and break down the silos and to focus everyone on ultimately what are they developed um delivering to the customer in the marketplace. So I think again we're talking about leadership quality in spades and and going back to you know to purpose and it's not soft and fluffy, it's got to help companies make big decisions.

Purpose Led Change Beyond AI

Marc Curtis 47:43

Yeah, and and and and and that's nothing to do with AI. AI is just another tool that that needs to be seen through the lens of what the company purpose is and where they want to get to. Yes, exactly. Yeah, I've I think that's really interesting. I I'd almost like to end the interview there because I think I think that's a lovely way to finish, but but I'm not going to. Um I I've got a couple more questions, and um, you know, and and by the way, genuinely, if if I think we're gonna provide the link to download the report from the conference board. It is well worth watch uh reading if you're a if you're a business leader, especially. I have already sent it to our leadership team as well, because it it it it's full of really great insights. But uh where do you see things going? Do you I mean I'm I'm not gonna ask you what AI is gonna look like in ten years' time because frankly, nobody knows that. But is there a worry that we're getting it wrong now? That that we're not as as a collective business community, as as workers and as professionals and as HR professionals, are we are we f asking the wrong questions right now? And and and if we are, and maybe it is just relitigating all the stuff you've just talked about, what what's what's the single thing that we should be asking or or the approach that we should be taking at this moment in time?

Displacement Risk And Urgent Reskilling

Speaker 48:58

Well, this will be my personal opinion, and and of course nobody really knows. I mean personally, I'm quite concerned about the fact that the technology is outstripping our ability to change and adjust quick enough. And you know, yes, at the macro picture, it might create new jobs and and our old jobs will go, but I just think that in this technological revolution the speed is a real problem. So, and I've been struck when we've been talking to companies about these big companies about how where where are they skilling, they're not talking about reskilling, it's all about skilling. Now, I think you know, we do face uh a possibility of of huge displacement of people. I think that women are are vulnerable because they're in a lot of industries that can be, you know, where um AI can take over. So there are some inclusion um aspects to think about. There's a societal thing. I would really like to see much more debate about it between companies and between companies and you know, regulators, between country companies and big, big, you know, organizations like the conference board, like the World Economic Forum. But I I do think there's some some urgency, and everybody, you know, it's still a bit siloed, pockets, but where are we hurtling? And I do think now is the time to ask some of those questions. Um you know, uh and and some of the it's it's interesting that OpenAI and Anthropic have been throwing out a few paper papers on the future of work, um and you know, uh and making some suggestions, but but their agenda perhaps is different. But I think there's a really urgent need to talk about look, it's the elephant in the room. How much disruption is there going to be to the workforce and what can we do about it? Because at the moment, certainly multinationals are not are not thinking about radical reskilling, they're thinking about just upskilling their their current workforces, and I would hate to see a whole swathe of you know disconnected, disenfranchised people who are losing their jobs and don't have the skills. So I so I think the reskilling and and uh is really urgent. And and probably it's not just companies, it's got to be, you know, national initiatives, international initiatives.

Marc Curtis 51:21

I I was I was at an event yesterday um uh um put on by one of our one of our customers. Um uh it was um in Brussels talking about human rights, um, talking about the um sustainability legislation that's coming out of the U. It's not it's not my area of speciality, but it was fascinating nonetheless. But but one thing that really, really struck me was that and again it's a cynical view, but but companies are going to do what companies do, right? At the end of the day, a corporation, unless they are exceptional in in in the way that they they present themselves or or the DNA of the company, and I'm thinking, you know, your Patagonias and and and so on. Most companies are interested in sustainable growth or or or growth and I'm using sustainable in insofar as you know, growth that that enables them to continue growing rather than necessarily being linked to sustainability and their continu the you know their continued existence and their profitability. That's what companies will do. It's the people within the companies who have a passion for protecting workers or protecting the environment, and they're the ones who often quite you know drive the agenda in these companies. So it it it's I guess the pessimistic view is that until until there is a wider discussion about the fact that AI isn't necessarily just a button that you can press to increase the profitability of the company and reduce its capex we're we are still gonna go headlong into that, right? So so it's it's somewhat.

Speaker 52:56

No, I I agree, it's a real danger. Yeah. A sort of a race to look at the same thing.

Marc Curtis 53:02

Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely, and and and especially if they're publicly traded companies, that they're they're always looking at you know quarterly or yearly reports, so consequently they're gonna make decisions that will look good on the balance sheet in six months' time rather than will guarantee the the survival of the company in ten years' time. Um so I guess it comes back to getting come countries to create legislation, which in itself is problematic because that will always necessarily be behind the advances that are being made. I mean I I I don't know where I'm going with this, frankly, because I'm just sort of talking myself into a bit of depression, but it uh you know I I want to understand how we can do what you've just said, how we how we can elevate those conversations.

Speaker 53:42

I think we have to go back to a belief in human ingenuity. I do, to the uniqueness of humans. And I think it is really about making serious investments in reskilling and upskilling and and not just to give, you know, to move as fast as we can from basic, as they're calling it, literacy and understanding, to to creating space for people to be, you know, to really rethink work and to make work, you know, something that that is fulfilling and worthwhile. Um so I think that's I think that's the answer. It's about focusing again on the humans and and also being you know making sure that there aren't people out there who are just completely being disadvantaged and and forgotten and overlooked. Um so again, it's sort of thinking long-term and and and being willing to make some short-term investments. And I'm encouraged by how some some you know vendors are are creating sort of um you know free, massive online sort of programmes and and learning. So so at least you know there are some opportunities out there, but that's what we've got to do, I think. Because humans are remarkable and they are remarkably ingenious, but you've got to give them the tools and the time and the space to to rethink things. And if if you know who's gonna re-invent work, it's gotta be the workers. It's gotta be.

A Personal Pioneer And Perspective

Marc Curtis 55:01

Absolutely. Otherwise, otherwise we're just we're just watching through a factory window at the robots doing our jobs for us. Um that I think is a good place to end. I will ask one more question, which I always ask people at the end of our podcast because I think it's interesting to me if if for nobody else. Um, if you had to identify one person who in your personal life or throughout your career has inspired you, somebody who you see as being a pioneer, um, and it could be anybody, it could be an author, it could be somebody from history, it could be your father, it could be anybody. Who who who would that be and why?

Speaker 55:33

Gosh.

Marc Curtis 55:34

That was a left-field question that I I like to throw in there because it you can't you can't um go back to your research on this one, I'm afraid.

Speaker 55:41

Well, then then I'm gonna have to give you probably a very left-field answer, to be honest. Uh someone who has inspired me in my life, for five years I was a chaplain at Beachy Head doing suicide intervention. It was voluntary, and uh it was literally um on the cliff edge talking to people who were there, and and Beachy Head gets, you know, we might have one suicidal person a day. Um so and the person the team leader inspired me because he, I mean, he was a minister, but he was uh I don't know, he he's and he still inspires me. He has a huge amount of fun, he's really quick thinking, but also he would in our conversations he would ask me very, very searching questions, and and and just sort of being in a situation where you're seeing life and death, I think that whole experience and his leadership gave me a new perspective on life, really. And and I guess that's partly where I do think people are extraordinary because you know that some of the people that we were speaking to had such huge problems and they had been resilient up to a point. I do think humans are incredibly resilient and in you know incredible and and just at times need a bit of support and help and and going back to AI and Gen AI, you know, this is where we come back to support and skilling, and and the companies that can do that will have breakthrough innovation, you know, and and and it's about as well you helping your employees to reach into your customers as well. And you know, there's a question mark, sorry, I'm going slightly diverging it. No, no, no, no, I'm I'm happy to. Customers themselves may, you know, we might get that but that pushback from I'm not gonna buy that because it's AI generated, I'm going for the real thing. You know, I I think we we we could also it might be that we all as customers will become more discerning about what is really human and what's AI. So anyway, so that person he he has he inspires me and his optimistic, energetic, can-do attitude in life um linked with the.

Closing And Future Work Workshop

Marc Curtis 57:41

I think it reflects very well on you, Marion, that you're inspired by somebody like that because I think who we choose to see as our heroes or our inspirations talks a lot about where we would like to be ourselves and the values that we would like to see in ourselves. So I think that that does you credit not only to have done that um that volunteer role to be but to be inspired by somebody like that. He sounds like an amazing human being. Um I'm gonna stop it there because I mean, honestly, there's so much to talk about. I mean, I I feel I feel bad in a way because we've we've had ranging conversations, and I and I really wanted to focus on the report that that um that you co-authored because because there's so much in there, but I know that there's so many other things that that that would be absolutely fascinating to talk to you about. But for now, I think we'll have to end it. And just to say, Marion, you're gonna be at the future work conference on the 18th of June, you're gonna be running a workshop um exploring more of these topics and themes. I you know, I can only imagine that that there'll be a lot of people wanting to join that. We're gonna be informing people about it now quite soon anyway. Um so but for now, thank you so much, Marion, for for taking the time. I've really enjoyed our chat.

Speaker 58:45

Thank you, Mark. I have to.