Featuring scholarly and practitioner insights from HR and people leaders, industry experts, and researchers.

In this HCI Webinar, I talk with Josh Bersin about the latest report out from the Josh Bersin Company report, The HR Leader's Guide to Multiagent HR Architecture (part of the HR 2030™ initiative), which outlines how HR leaders must govern over 151 specialized AI agents and 8 functional "superagents". The core thesis is that orchestration, not agent count, drives value. Josh Bersin is an analyst, author, educator, and thought leader focusing on the global talent market and the challenges and trends impacting business workforces around the world. He studies the world of work, HR and leadership practices, and the broad talent technology market. He is often cited as one of the leading HR and workplace industry analysts in the world.

Abstract: Organizations routinely promote people into management for reasons that predict little about how well they will lead: strong individual performance, visible confidence, and a willingness to raise a hand. New evidence sharpens the cost of that habit. A 2026 study in the Quarterly Journal of Economics found that teams led by self-nominated managers performed worse than teams with randomly assigned leaders, while a 2026 American Economic Review study showed that subjective "potential" ratings account for roughly half of a large retailer's gender promotion gap. Survey data released in 2026 add that employees and organizations value different leadership qualities, and that misconduct by leaders is less likely than misconduct by junior staff to carry consequences. This article reviews the research on how leaders emerge versus how they perform, describes the organizational and human costs of selection error, and outlines five evidence-based responses: separating reward from role, structured assessment, de-biased potential judgments, team-based leadership measurement, and supported transitions. It closes with three pillars for building durable leadership selection capability.

Workforce reductions are increasingly common due to financial pressures and technological shifts like artificial intelligence, yet they frequently damage organizational trust, employee wellbeing, and institutional knowledge when handled poorly. Recent evidence from federal employee exit surveys demonstrates that many purported voluntary resignations actually stem from intense workplace pressure, leaving departing staff feeling disrespected and duties unmanaged. To mitigate these negative outcomes, organizational research suggests that leaders should treat headcount cuts as an absolute last resort and design choice rather than an automatic financial fix. When layoffs become unavoidable, maintaining procedural and interactional justice through transparent decision-making, respectful communication, and robust transition support is critical for preserving employer reputation. Ultimately, organizations that prioritize dignified exits and strategic workforce planning protect the commitment of surviving employees while safeguarding the vital social capital necessary for future performance.

Workforce reductions are increasingly common due to financial pressures and technological shifts like artificial intelligence, yet they frequently damage organizational trust, employee wellbeing, and institutional knowledge when handled poorly. Recent evidence from federal employee exit surveys demonstrates that many purported voluntary resignations actually stem from intense workplace pressure, leaving departing staff feeling disrespected and duties unmanaged. To mitigate these negative outcomes, organizational research suggests that leaders should treat headcount cuts as an absolute last resort and design choice rather than an automatic financial fix. When layoffs become unavoidable, maintaining procedural and interactional justice through transparent decision-making, respectful communication, and robust transition support is critical for preserving employer reputation. Ultimately, organizations that prioritize dignified exits and strategic workforce planning protect the commitment of surviving employees while safeguarding the vital social capital necessary for future performance.

Workforce reductions are increasingly common due to financial pressures and technological shifts like artificial intelligence, yet they frequently damage organizational trust, employee wellbeing, and institutional knowledge when handled poorly. Recent evidence from federal employee exit surveys demonstrates that many purported voluntary resignations actually stem from intense workplace pressure, leaving departing staff feeling disrespected and duties unmanaged. To mitigate these negative outcomes, organizational research suggests that leaders should treat headcount cuts as an absolute last resort and design choice rather than an automatic financial fix. When layoffs become unavoidable, maintaining procedural and interactional justice through transparent decision-making, respectful communication, and robust transition support is critical for preserving employer reputation. Ultimately, organizations that prioritize dignified exits and strategic workforce planning protect the commitment of surviving employees while safeguarding the vital social capital necessary for future performance.

Workforce reductions are increasingly common due to financial pressures and technological shifts like artificial intelligence, yet they frequently damage organizational trust, employee wellbeing, and institutional knowledge when handled poorly. Recent evidence from federal employee exit surveys demonstrates that many purported voluntary resignations actually stem from intense workplace pressure, leaving departing staff feeling disrespected and duties unmanaged. To mitigate these negative outcomes, organizational research suggests that leaders should treat headcount cuts as an absolute last resort and design choice rather than an automatic financial fix. When layoffs become unavoidable, maintaining procedural and interactional justice through transparent decision-making, respectful communication, and robust transition support is critical for preserving employer reputation. Ultimately, organizations that prioritize dignified exits and strategic workforce planning protect the commitment of surviving employees while safeguarding the vital social capital necessary for future performance.

In this HCI Webinar, I talk with Sam Mandel about driving compassionate, forward-thinking health care. Sam Mandel is the Co-Founder and Chief Executive Officer of Ketamine Clinics Los Angeles and a driving force in compassionate, forward-thinking mental health care. His commitment to supporting others began early when, at twelve years old, he volunteered at a teen suicide prevention hotline. That formative experience sparked a lifelong dedication to mental health advocacy and ultimately led him to co-found Ketamine Clinics Los Angeles in 2014 alongside his father, Dr. Steven L. Mandel. Sam is a recognized voice in innovative psychiatry and ketamine infusion therapy. He has been featured in Entrepreneur’s Top 10 Inspiring Healthcare Entrepreneurs to Watch and honored by MSN as an Entrepreneur Leading the Business Frontier. He is also a two-time Stevie Award recipient for Best Entrepreneur and Thought Leader of the Year at the American Business Awards. Major media outlets frequently seek out Sam for commentary, and he regularly speaks at scientific conferences and industry events on the current state and future of mental health care. Under Sam’s leadership, Ketamine Clinics Los Angeles has delivered more than 35,000 ketamine infusions to over 6,000 patients, helping establish one of the field's most respected standards of care. His work continues to shape the future of mental health care through a commitment to clinical excellence, ethical leadership, and genuine compassion for the individuals and families KCLA serves. Outside of the clinic, Sam enjoys weightlifting, spending time in nature, attending concerts, dancing, snowboarding, traveling, and being with friends and family.

Abstract: Workforce reductions have become a recurring feature of organizational life, driven by cost pressure, restructuring, and the adoption of artificial intelligence. New evidence from the Federal Employee Exit Survey, which gathered accounts from 2,045 former U.S. career civil servants, shows how badly exits can go when they are rushed, opaque, and poorly supported: most departures were not truly voluntary, people removed through reductions in force rated the dignity of their exit near the floor of the scale, and only one in ten said their responsibilities were fully covered when they left. This article situates those findings within three decades of research on organizational justice, downsizing, and job loss. It shows that the way reductions are decided, delivered, and followed up shapes survivor commitment, voluntary turnover, employer reputation, legal exposure, and the health of those who leave. It then sets out five evidence-based responses and three long-term capabilities that allow leaders to reduce headcount, when they must, without destroying the trust and knowledge that future performance depends on.