Resistance may not be futile, but integration is inevitable

Is resistance futile? That’s what HBR asked a handful of HR leaders. Is the future of HR a combined function with IT? Is it, as SHRM has suggested, where AI meets HI (human intelligence)?

Not surprisingly, the answer is “it depends.” That’s what the HR leaders that HBR polled had to say.

While there wasn’t overwhelming agreement that HR and IT will unite, there was emerging consensus that integration is inevitable. But what is integration? Is it just a closer working relationship? Does it mean more shared meetings, documents, and projects? How should HR, IT, and other leaders (Security, Legal, Finance) understand this concept?

Roger Martin, the #1 management thinker in the world, has some ideas on the matter. He defines integrative thinking as “the ability to face constructively the tension of opposing models and instead of choosing one at the expense of the other, to generate a creative resolution of the tension in the form of a new model that contains elements of the individual models but is superior to each.” Or, more simply put, integration is the best of both (or many) in one. This offers leaders a helpful framing as they consider how different functions might join forces. You could combine the HR and IT functions, like Moderna did. Or like 64 percent of IT leaders who responded to a Nexthink survey plan to do in the next five years.

As to whether to combine the HR and IT functions, the HBR piece ends with a series of questions for leaders to consider:

• What problem are we solving?
• Where does balance matter most?
• Are we structurally ready?
• What signal does this send?
• Are we investing in both sides of the equation?

These aren’t bad questions to ask. Still, it seems more important, again bringing Roger Martin into the equation, to ask:

• What is our winning aspiration?
• Where will we play?
• How will we win?
• What capabilities must we have?
• What management systems will enable our success?

In short, leaders need to know their strategy to make choices about their functions. The “why” leads to the “what.” Resisting this is both foolish and futile.