In an attempt to stick to the goal I set last time around, I’ve been spending more time on LinkedIn, and what do you know? My algorithm appears to be improving. That, or the various humans from LinkedIn who keep visiting my profile, heard my moaning and want to shut me up. Though I’m guessing it’s the former.
During one of these recent scroll sessions, I came across this post about repositioning the Chief Information Officer title from tech to comms. His argument is that, at this point in time, the CIO title no longer suits that particular role, and he believes that Chief Technology Officer is more universally apropos. At the same time, OP spells out reasons why CIO is a better fit for Chief Communications Officers.
Understandably, the response in the comments is mixed. A few folks agree. The rest do not. I am somewhere in the middle, and here’s why: I’m less concerned with what we call Chief Communications Officers. I am more concerned that companies are going without these leaders entirely – and that goes for marketing, too. It’s a serious problem.
I’ve been following this trend for some time, even observing an uptick in openings at the beginning of 2025 before a sharp reversal. So, I decided to do a little research. I can’t say this is a statistically sound sample, merely me testing a hypothesis by looking at the structure of Fortune 100 companies, figuring if anyone is going to have a CCO and/or CMO, it’s them, right? Not quite. Of the 25 companies I examined, only three had both. Eight didn’t have either one. And the rest had a CMO, CCO, or something close (though I shudder to think about the person handling legal, compliance, brand, and comms all at once). And before you come at me, yes, I factored the possibility of fractional executives in, too.
Why does this matter? Well, for starters, while marketing and communications are two very distinct disciplines, both are responsible for how a company presents to its external audiences. Comms pros can also help with internal messaging, something the folks at Oracle could have given additional thought to before hitting send on that 6 a.m. email. But given the scope of that move, I doubt they really cared anyway.
So, let’s take another example I saw on LinkedIn. A people leader from a VC-backed wealth management company that describes itself as helping clients achieve better financial outcomes, told a story about how the company didn’t have the money to offer the candidate they wanted, so another member of the team stepped up to bridge the gap from their own salary (I hope it was the CEO). The post is really an analogy about the type of people you should hire, and thankfully, the team member didn’t have to contribute, so it all worked out. However, what does this say about an organization responsible for other people’s money? What does it say to the reader about their culture? What does it say about how they communicate internally?
In this case, I don’t see any evidence of anyone managing communications, and even marketing seems purely biz dev, with no focus on brand. Maybe they have outside counsel. I mean, that’s what I do, but the larger point here is, someone needs to be paying attention. Without comms and marketing leaders, there’s always risk involved (and AI agents don’t cut it!). At a minimum, there’s the potential for brand misrepresentation, or, worse, borderline disfigurement, like the story above. At its worst, you end up a case study in a crisis comms textbook or the most hated company in the country.
TL;DR: It takes years to build a reputation and one second (or in today’s world, one post) to shatter it. Stop skimping on expertise when it comes to messaging who you are and what you’re about.
Dear Laura,
I’m in a tough situation. My org is still hiring, but my team (Talent Acquisition) is at odds with the HR Business Partners, which is adding to the existing friction we have with our hiring managers. Everyone is tense, and no one is taking accountability. Any advice for how to navigate this?
Thanks for your help,
Feeling Caught
Dear Feeling Caught,
For as long as I’ve worked in recruitment for HR (19 years, if you were curious!) I have seen/felt/heard of the tension between corporate Talent Acquisition and HRBP teams. I say this, not to condone this tension, but to validate it for you. It’s sadly very common, and you aren’t alone. I do commend you for noticing the pattern and wanting to do something about it!
Let’s explore first why this happens. Historically, HR departments felt undervalued, underappreciated, under-resourced and protective of their remit of control. While things have changed (and hopefully continue to change!) for the better, we are still feeling the impact of this deeper, systemic conditioning to how things used to be.
People feel very territorial, as they say. So, HRBPs often want the ‘strategic partnership’ with hiring managers (maybe because they had it long before TA became a strategic function. Maybe because they fear losing power or control, or for fear of their own job security. Maybe for control issues or trust issues. It’s so layered!) It’s probably well above our skill set to analyze it all, but we do need to at least acknowledge that it’s happening and it’s likely happening from a deep, internal level.
Alas, time to look at what you can control. Only your own actions and behaviors. First step: let your HRBP partner know you want a seamless, collaborative, trusting relationship. I’d remind them that you have a shared goal: ensuring the hiring managers are satisfied and thriving, and that you have both done your job of guiding them to smart hiring decisions. That makes TA and HRBP a team, not nemeses. You may also want to go to your leader and ask them for communication training and/or bring in an expert to host a webinar or coaching session for your teams to help you bridge this gap. It’s bigger than you, so learning how to ask for resources and support is a beautiful practice.
No one person is to blame. But this does require a concerted, intentional effort to improve it. Noticing it was the first step! You’ve got this. Let us know how it goes.
Your friend,
I’m still making my way through Deloitte’s 2026 Human Capital Trends Report. It’s a favorite of mine every year, and this year is no different. I’m fixated on four chapters in particular: AI and the future of decision making, Dealing with AI’s cultural debt, Have organizational functions outlived their function? and Staying relevant in a world that won’t sit still.
It’s an interesting dichotomy: seeing brands openly post about not using AI in their marketing materials, while knowing that, inside organizations, employees are being forced to use these tools for productivity and other purposes. Clearly, consumers don’t want to consume AI-generated content … but the workforce needs to for the bottom line? You have to wonder how this will play out.
Workday’s most recent CTO, Peter Bailis, who only joined the company last May, has jumped ship for Anthropic, where his new title is “Member of Technical Staff.” Given Bailis’s previous experience and Anthropic’s current roadmap, it’s reported that he’ll be working on the company’s HR applications, which will have interesting implications for the already reeling work tech arena.
Increasingly, my clients are asking that we remove notetakers from calls. All notetakers. Can’t say this is a huge surprise, given that the Otter.ai lawsuit is still pending. Wonder how long it will be before we go back to straight-up phone calls.
M&A seems to be heating up with Paylocity snatching up Grayscale, Crosschq acquiring Traitify, and Lattice taking on Mandala – and that's just what’s been announced in the last few weeks.
Why exactly are HR transformations failing? There are plenty of experts out there, plenty of companies eager to evolve – so what’s going wrong? This Reworked article aims to answer those questions with another question. Worth a read.
Reading: “Girl on Girl: How Pop Culture Turned a Generation of Women Against Themselves,” by Sophie Gilbert. This feels like it should be required reading for anyone musing over generational issues or raising kids in the modern world.
Watching: Given everything happening lately, I continue to look for comedy in my downtime, which brought me to Chris Fleming: Live at the Palace. If you’re unfamiliar, I recommend starting with the conga line.
Listening: Bleached. One of those bands I return to again and again, having first seen them in, like, 2012? “Hard to Kill” is an especially motivating song, and “Ride Your Heart” is a flawless album if you’re looking to start somewhere.
Exploring: Looka. While Canva offers a lot in helping those without in-house design resources, Looka is an AI logo generator that provides a helpful first step for anyone looking to launch a new idea.
While I’m hesitant to say spring has sprung here on the East Coast, as it’s been a Code Blue alert the last few nights, I’m going to attempt to touch grass this weekend and play in the dirt. My partner-in-podcasting George LaRocque will be returning from his travels soon, giving us lots to catch up on, so stay tuned for a new episode of Up Next @ WorkTech. And I’ll be heading to HR Brew’s Talent 2030 Collective event in NYC on April 21 – say hi if you’re there.
Until next time.
- Katie
No posts
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.