By: Emily Dickens

America’s skills pipeline is broken — and the leaks are widening.

Too many of our schools and training programs are still preparing students for yesterday’s jobs instead of tomorrow’s careers. What once was a manageable inconvenience for employers is now a looming crisis. If we don’t act, we risk losing an entire generation of talent.

The consequences are clear: weaker companies, diminished competitiveness, skyrocketing social costs and deeper political strain in an already polarized era. But this isn’t inevitable. We can rebuild the pipeline by focusing on skills — not just degrees. A diploma can no longer be seen as the first and last credential in a career. Continuous reskilling and adaptation must become the norm, especially as artificial intelligence reshapes the world of work.

This requires bold action from every sector. Schools must embed career-ready skills into curricula. Employers must expand internships, apprenticeships and other work-based learning to open doors for first jobs and long-term careers. Hiring itself must evolve — skills and adaptability should outweigh where someone studied or what’s on their resume.

Policy has to keep pace. That’s why we champion initiatives like the Youth Workforce Readiness Act, the Connecting Small Businesses with Career and Technical Education Graduates Act, and the reauthorization of WIOA. But solutions won’t look the same everywhere; state and local leaders must tailor strategies to their own industries and communities.

At SHRM, we’re advancing this work through our E² (Education-to-Employment) initiative, connecting HR leaders, educators and policymakers to modernize the talent pipeline. Many efforts have been made to address workforce challenges, but too often HR — the function closest to the heartbeat of the workforce — was not included. HR’s voice is critical; we understand the full employee journey, from onboarding through ongoing development. Our perspective ensures solutions are practical and scalable.

Change on this scale will be disruptive. But it will also unlock unprecedented opportunity, lowering barriers to new jobs and careers. America has faced workforce challenges before, but never one so sweeping. The difference today is that we have the knowledge, tools, and resources to meet it head-on.

If we patch the leaks in our talent pipeline, it can once again propel our people — and our economy — to lead the world.

By: Kathryn Moody

The human-machine era is here, and CHROs must develop an HR-focused AI strategy to stay ahead, Gartner said in a press release Oct. 2 — but those leaders are struggling to build a culture that will enable this.

In other words, CHROs may play a key role in determining how work is shaped in years to come. Many organizations are still in an experimental phase, Gartner said, so CHROs need to be open to new ways of managing talent and workloads.

To do so, CHROs will need to create a work culture that enables employees to feel productive and engaged, but they are failing to deliver on this promise, Gartner said. July data from Gartner revealed that, of 222 CHROs surveyed, less than half said their culture drives employee performance.

“HR must equip managers to have actionable productivity discussions with employees. And employees must feel empowered to solve their own productivity problems,” Mark Whittle, vice president of advisory in the Gartner HR practice, said in a statement.

One aspect that CHROs could pay more attention to: helping leaders be ready to face change, Gartner said.

Employees may not be ready for the scope of change that is to come, a September report from The Grossman Group said, especially as business leaders expect change to ramp up in the coming years. Employees need to be fully bought-in for change to work, the report said, reflecting similar sentiments in the Gartner report — especially since change “has become ungovernable,” Gartner said.

Luckily, HR professionals say they are ready to manage that change, a July report from The Conference Board said. To prepare the workforce, CHROs can lead the charge in clarifying expectations for leaders; helping leaders and employees regulate their discomfort; and teaching leaders how to build “change reflexes,” Gartner said.

By Carolyn Crist

Among companies with remote-first schedules as their default mode of work, 83% reported high productivity, with 21% saying it’s “very high,” according to a Sept. 24 report from the Institute for Corporate Productivity and Akamai Technologies, a cybersecurity and cloud company.

Notably, 62% of remote-friendly companies said they don’t use surveillance tools, such as VPN usage logs or keystroke tracking, signaling a “strong culture of mutual trust,” the report found.

“We want our employees to work where they get their best work done. Flexible work is a proven way to empower employees,” Anthony Williams, executive vice president and chief human resources officer at Akamai, said in a statement.

In a survey of 59 senior leaders and HR pros, 52% reported being remote-first, with most making the shift during or shortly after the pandemic. Only 7% said they had plans to revert in the future.

The top drivers for adopting remote-first models included access to a wider talent pool (72%), work-life balance (62%) and retention (31%).

To foster connection in a remote-first model, these companies organize annual and semi-annual in-person gatherings, including strategy sessions (86%), team-building events (76%) and social gatherings (72%).

As part of its own remote-focused model, Akamai noted benefits such as higher employee performance ratings, a 7.3% attrition rate (below the global tech average of 13.2%) and a 15% year-over-year increase in global applicants per hire in 2025.

Flexible work schedules have stabilized in recent years, with about half of workplaces choosing hybrid models, according to a Gallup report. Managers play a key role in defining the future of work by addressing challenges such as team coordination and trust, Gallup said.

Despite what is said in the Akamai survey, however, remote monitoring may be more common; references to “corporate surveillance” on Glassdoor increased 51% year-over-year for the first quarter of 2025 and 216% since 2021. Monitoring software may affect workplace culture and productivity, though, which leaders should consider when implementing new programs, a Glassdoor researcher said.

By: Ginger Christ

Almost 3 in 4 hiring managers of the nearly 2,200 surveyed say they are worried about meeting candidates’ salary expectations, and generally they say total compensation will play a larger role in recruiting.

Half of companies expect that offering new benefits and perks will be effective in recruiting next year.

“While offering a competitive salary is imperative, it shouldn’t be the only consideration,” Fay said. “Employers who embrace both monetary and non-monetary perks and benefits will stand out to candidates who are evaluating offers.”

If offered the same base pay as they currently have, candidates said financial incentives, work-life balance perks, retirement planning and health and wellness offerings could entice them to switch employers. In fact, 53% of the nearly 2,000 candidates surveyed said they would switch jobs for better financial incentives like bonuses and stock options.

A Sept. 3 report from The Conference Board had similar findings to Robert Half, indicating that companies are focusing their investments on critical skills and positions. Companies are being more strategic about how they spend their salary dollars and are “channeling budgets into roles and skills that really move the needle — like critical capabilities and internal upskilling,” a leader at The Conference Board said at the time.

By: Caroline Colvin

If there is one common thread throughout recent research about AI at work, it’s that there is no definitive take on how people are using the technology and how they feel about the imperative to do so. Language learning models can be used to draft policies, generative AI can be used for image creation, and machine learning can be used for predictive analytics, Ines Bahr, a senior Capterra analyst who specializes in HR industry trends, told HR Dive via email.

Still, there’s a lack of clarity around which tools should be used and when, because of the broad range of applications on the market, Bahr said. Organizations have implemented these tools, but “usage policies are often confusing to employees,” Bahr told HR Dive via email — which leads to the unsanctioned but not always malicious use of certain tech tools.

The result can be unethical or even allegedly illegal actions: AI use can create data privacy concerns, run afoul of state and local laws and give rise to claims of identity-based discrimination.

Compliance and culture go hand in hand
While AI ethics policies largely address compliance, culture can be an equally important component. If employers can explain the reasoning behind AI rules, “employees feel empowered by AI rather than threatened,” Bahr said.

“By guaranteeing human oversight and communicating that AI is a tool to assist workers, not replace, a company creates an environment where employees not only use AI compliantly but also responsibly” Bahr added.

Kevin Frechette, CEO of AI software company Fairmarkit, emphasized similar themes in his advice for HR professionals building an AI ethics policy.

The best policies answer two questions, he said: “How will AI help our teams do their best work, and how will we make sure it never erodes trust?”

“If you can’t answer how your AI will make someone’s day better, you’re probably not ready to write the policy,” Frechette said over email.

Many policy conversations, he said, are backward, prioritizing the technology instead of the workers themselves: “An AI ethics policy shouldn’t start with the model; it should start with the people it impacts.”

Consider industry-specific issues

Industries involved in creating AI tools have additional layers to consider: Bahr pointed to research from Capterra that revealed that software vulnerabilities were the top cause of data breaches in the U.S. last year.

“AI-generated code or vibe coding can present a security risk, especially if the AI model is trained on public code and inadvertently replicates existing vulnerabilities into new code,” Bahr explained.

An AI disclosure policy should address security risks, create internal review guidelines for AI-generated code, and provide training to promote secure coding practices, Bahr said.

For companies involved in content creation, an AI disclosure could be required and should address how workers are responsible for the final product or outcome, Bahr said.

“This policy not only signals to the general public that human input has been involved in published content, but also establishes responsibilities for employees to comply with necessary disclosures,” Bahr said.

“Beyond fact-checking, the policy needs to address the use of intellectual property in public AI tools,” she said. “For example, an entertainment company should be clear about using an actor’s voice to create new lines of dialogue without their permission.”

Likewise, a software sales representative could be able to explain to clients how AI is used in the company’s products. Customer data use can also be a part of disclosure policy, for example.

The policy’s in place. What now?
Because AI technology is constantly evolving, employers must remain flexible, experts say.

“A static AI policy will be outdated before the ink dries,” according to Frechette of Fairmarkit. “Treat it like a living playbook that evolves with the tech, the regulations, and the needs of your workforce,” he told HR Dive via email.

HR also should continue to test the AI policies and update them regularly, according to Frechette. “It’s not about getting it perfect on Day One,” he said. “It’s about making sure it’s still relevant and effective six months later.”

By: Michele McGovern

The Great Flattening is expanding and its impact could be detrimental to workplaces.

The flattening — eliminating middle managers to cut costs, reduce red tape, and/or simplify organizational charts — started in the tech industry and is now creeping into many more.

Tech giants such as Amazon, Microsoft and Google started flattening their corporate profile last year. Retailers such as Walmart, Wayfair and Starbucks and finance corporations such as HSBC and Ernst & Young, followed suit this year.

And then there’s the federal government’s flattening: the Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE) work to maximize the efficiency and productivity of the government.

Data on the Great Flattening
To put the private sector’s changes in perspective, consider this: In 2024, middle managers made up 29% of all layoffs, according to job-tracker Live Data Technologies. That was a 30+% spike from 2018 to 2022, when middle managers consistently represented about 20% of annual layoffs.

2 Takes on the Great Flattening
So, there are two ways to look at the Great Flattening.

On a positive side, it’s a way to save money, resources and time. It disassembles overly bureaucratic organizations and processes. In theory, things get done more efficiently and quickly. People who might have been stifled under management get a chance to shine.

On the other side, when you remove a layer of management, you also remove a layer of certainty. Some employees need guidance, encouragement and/or a prod to get things done. So in a flattened organization, there are higher risks for miscommunication, mistakes, lost productivity and lower morale.

“Beyond the direct negative impact to middle managers who have to compete for a new job in an already challenged labor market, the greatest suffering will be among individual contributors on teams where middle managers have been made obsolete,” says Brad Smith, Chief Science Officer at meQuilibrium (meQ). “Beyond the negative impact on team mental well-being …. execution of corporate strategy is also likely to suffer. Middle managers have historically been the filterers and translators into action of senior executives’ business-speak.”

What’s the Impact?
The Great Flattening will have consequences. In fact, meQ had some insight before this became a trend.

“meQ’s State of the Workforce studies over the last five years consistently show the pivotal role of the middle manager,” says Smith. “Whether the outcome is burnout, depression, turnover intent, engagement, incivility, hope or any of a number of other indicators of workforce mental well-being, the most consistent predictor of a positive outcome is having a manager who is intentional about looking after team mental well-being.”

So middle managers were already burned out. And when their well-being suffers, their employees will likely, too. Take them out of the picture and everyone suffers more.

“The great flattening is likely to be highly disruptive to direct human contact between employees and leaders,” says Smith. “These changes will disrupt organizational social support networks and place ever-greater demands on remaining leaders.”

Must You Flatten?
While every organization must do what it needs to do to stay afloat, there are things you’ll want to consider before pulling managers from the front line:

Can other managers absorb some of the management duties?
Are the employees impacted by the layoffs prepared to navigate work with less guidance?
How will the layoffs affect morale, productivity and turnover?
Will employees be able to coordinate and cooperate to meet goals?
How much realignment will we need to do to ensure we meet goals — and are we able to scale up in time?
What technology changes will we require, and can we train employees to handle those changes?
What are we willing to give up to make a flattening work?
“Employers should work to strengthen teams to pave the way for intensified employee-to-employee cooperation,” says Smith. “In addition, employers must ensure that the workforce has adequate access to digital resources and EAPs that can help maintain workforce resilience and mental well-being, and preserve current levels of performance.”

How to Handle the Great Flattening
Now, let’s say you must flatten. How do you make it work?

Experts at Korn Ferry looked at several medium-sized businesses that learned how to survive — even thrive — without traditional managers. Here’s what they’ve found works:

Accountability. Employees and senior-level leaders remain accountable to each other and customers. For this to fully work, though, employees must hold themselves accountable to others and be willing to call on colleagues to be accountable or call them out for failing to be.
Transparency. All information remains transparent to all employees. Through technology, meetings and constant updates, employees and leaders share information they have and seek what they don’t know.
Incentives. Most — if not all — rewards are team-based. When the team succeeds, the team is rewarded. When there is a failure, everyone knows it, feels it and pays the consequences.
Skills. Flat companies often push aside egos, degrees and tenure when it comes to keeping and hiring employees. Instead, they focus on problem-solving skills, practical experience and competent decision-making.
Growth. Despite the structure, successful flat companies emphasize growth and reward employees with opportunities to further succeed.