I see it a bit similar to 3rd party workers. As much as we wrung our hands over the years as to whether these workers should be owned by HR, ultimately they are still managed by procurement *but* a good HR team understands who they are, what they are doing, how they fit in and are included in some traditional processes.
So I would say that HR first needs to understand the work to be delivered by the business and then how both agents and 3rd parties are (can be/will be) accomplishing this work and what this means for the human workforce (finding ways to grow skills and capability for work not being accomplished by AI/3rd party).
Hi Amy, the difference is that third party workers (contractors) are humans, so an argument can be made that HR should play a role in the contractor relationship (which I fully agree with). But AI agents are not humans, so I do not see the same type of role for HR. HR *might* be involved with workforce planning, as Richard originally wrote. But generally I do not see HR professionals with the detailed knowledge of the actual work performed. But this is your domain, so I’m willing to be adjusted 😀
Yes, this is a really good point. Agents wouldn't be included in processes like learning that 3rd party workers are included in. And I agree that HR wouldn't be involved in managing or relationship-ing with agents. However, HR is going to need to understand how agents fit in and how that affects employees - and the only way to do this is to get an understanding of the work, which as @Meg Bear has shared is a whole new skill for HR to develop.
Amy, I agree with all you said. The more I think about this, the more I see that HR skills will need to evolve and be elevated to deal with the changes that AI agents bring to the workforce. And it’s not yet clear exactly how this will play out. Hope you are well.
"Over the next 24 months, the public will begin to see a new corporate department dedicated to the oversight and management of AI agents: the “AI Operations and Ethics Department,” or possibly something that sounds much cooler, like “AI Guardian Department""
If this is an area of growth and HR is an area of decline, this might be a good career path for HR personnel (in addition to growing skill and awareness in this area if staying in HR)
Lots of potential disruption to HR, I agree, especially at lower skill levels as AI takes over the routine work. Same with customer service. Which raises the question, how do entry level people gain experience?
BTW, it's an interesting article. At the beginning the author (at Google) writes, "I’m already seeing some big brands develop and deploy specialized AI labor departments." However, I searched carefully and could not find any mention of who those big brands are. Perhaps he is under NDA, but I think the story would have been a lot more powerful if he could have cited them.
I'm sure you've seen the CES statement from Jensen saying IT will be HR for these agents. I think this is a great conversation because it's going to be quite messy. I think there are several conversations that need to happen with first principles vs. just trying to evolve current roles. These topics include governance, risk, culture, compliance but most importantly this conversation is about work. What work happens where and who is responsible for the results (and missteps). I think we have a lot to learn here before we have a good sense of what the supporting and amplifying roles inside an organization need to be. I do think both the ratios and the nature of the HR role will evolve based on this, but as a second order change. First order has to be getting better clarity on where, how and what agents should and should not be doing.
I agree with you. For most companies, HR does not manage workers, other than those in HR. They don't determine training requirements, nor policies and other guidelines for non-HR people to perform their jobs. HR is typically more administrative.
I see it a bit similar to 3rd party workers. As much as we wrung our hands over the years as to whether these workers should be owned by HR, ultimately they are still managed by procurement *but* a good HR team understands who they are, what they are doing, how they fit in and are included in some traditional processes.
So I would say that HR first needs to understand the work to be delivered by the business and then how both agents and 3rd parties are (can be/will be) accomplishing this work and what this means for the human workforce (finding ways to grow skills and capability for work not being accomplished by AI/3rd party).
Hi Amy, the difference is that third party workers (contractors) are humans, so an argument can be made that HR should play a role in the contractor relationship (which I fully agree with). But AI agents are not humans, so I do not see the same type of role for HR. HR *might* be involved with workforce planning, as Richard originally wrote. But generally I do not see HR professionals with the detailed knowledge of the actual work performed. But this is your domain, so I’m willing to be adjusted 😀
Yes, this is a really good point. Agents wouldn't be included in processes like learning that 3rd party workers are included in. And I agree that HR wouldn't be involved in managing or relationship-ing with agents. However, HR is going to need to understand how agents fit in and how that affects employees - and the only way to do this is to get an understanding of the work, which as @Meg Bear has shared is a whole new skill for HR to develop.
Amy, I agree with all you said. The more I think about this, the more I see that HR skills will need to evolve and be elevated to deal with the changes that AI agents bring to the workforce. And it’s not yet clear exactly how this will play out. Hope you are well.
Here's an interesting and highly relevant take:
https://www.allbusiness.com/ai-agents-in-the-workplace
"Over the next 24 months, the public will begin to see a new corporate department dedicated to the oversight and management of AI agents: the “AI Operations and Ethics Department,” or possibly something that sounds much cooler, like “AI Guardian Department""
If this is an area of growth and HR is an area of decline, this might be a good career path for HR personnel (in addition to growing skill and awareness in this area if staying in HR)
Lots of potential disruption to HR, I agree, especially at lower skill levels as AI takes over the routine work. Same with customer service. Which raises the question, how do entry level people gain experience?
BTW, it's an interesting article. At the beginning the author (at Google) writes, "I’m already seeing some big brands develop and deploy specialized AI labor departments." However, I searched carefully and could not find any mention of who those big brands are. Perhaps he is under NDA, but I think the story would have been a lot more powerful if he could have cited them.
It will be interesting!
I am well and hope you are too, Frank :)
I'm sure you've seen the CES statement from Jensen saying IT will be HR for these agents. I think this is a great conversation because it's going to be quite messy. I think there are several conversations that need to happen with first principles vs. just trying to evolve current roles. These topics include governance, risk, culture, compliance but most importantly this conversation is about work. What work happens where and who is responsible for the results (and missteps). I think we have a lot to learn here before we have a good sense of what the supporting and amplifying roles inside an organization need to be. I do think both the ratios and the nature of the HR role will evolve based on this, but as a second order change. First order has to be getting better clarity on where, how and what agents should and should not be doing.
I agree with you. For most companies, HR does not manage workers, other than those in HR. They don't determine training requirements, nor policies and other guidelines for non-HR people to perform their jobs. HR is typically more administrative.