With decades of experience in management consulting, Marco Gaietti has become a leading voice on the intersection of business management and human resources. He specializes in guiding organizations through complex transformations, particularly as artificial intelligence reshapes strategic priorities. In our conversation, we explore the paradox of AI-driven productivity, where initial time savings are often erased by a hidden “AI tax.” We’ll delve into the necessary evolution of HR from a vertical administrative function to a lateral strategic partner, the urgent need to redesign jobs to match AI’s capabilities, and the rising importance of uniquely human skills like judgment and discernment in an automated world. Finally, we’ll examine how the roles of both the CHRO and frontline managers are being fundamentally redefined to lead in this new era.
Many organizations find that up to 40% of AI-driven time savings are lost to rework and verification. Why does this “AI tax” exist, and what practical steps can leaders take to ensure technology translates into genuine productivity gains, not just more activity?
This “AI tax” is a frustrating and very real phenomenon that exposes a critical disconnect in how we’re adopting technology. We see incredible surface-level gains—employees saving up to seven hours a week—but then nearly 40% of that time gets consumed by fixing, verifying, and refining what the AI produces. The root cause isn’t the technology itself, but our approach to implementing it. We are handing employees revolutionary tools but leaving them to operate within archaic job structures and processes. The result is what the market is calling “AI slop”—low-quality, generic outputs that someone else has to clean up later. To turn this around, leaders must stop focusing solely on the tool and start focusing on the work. This means actively redesigning roles, investing in training for critical thinking and judgment, and shifting the cultural expectation from speed to quality. It requires a conscious effort to build what I call the “judgment muscle” across the organization, so humans can effectively discern, prioritize, and add context to what AI generates.
You’ve described HR’s evolution from a vertical, administrative function to a more lateral, strategic partner. What does this “East-West” operational model look like day-to-day, and what specific business acumen must HR professionals develop to earn a seat at the decision-making table?
The shift from a “North-South” to an “East-West” model is a fundamental change in HR’s entire orientation. The old North-South model was vertical and siloed; HR focused on its own kingdom of policies, compliance, and transactions. It was an internal support function. In the new East-West model, HR operates horizontally across the entire organization. Day-to-day, this means HR professionals are embedded in cross-functional teams, working alongside operations, finance, and marketing on critical business initiatives. They’re not just executing HR tasks; they are co-creating solutions for talent allocation, skill development, and organizational design in real-time. To earn this seat, the required acumen goes far beyond traditional HR knowledge. You must understand the core mechanics of the business: how value is created, where the real productivity levers are, and how different functions connect to deliver results. It’s about speaking the language of business outcomes, not just HR processes.
With AI adoption outpacing job redesign, many employees are using futuristic tools within outdated role structures. How does this disconnect create friction and inefficiency, and what is the CHRO’s step-by-step process for redesigning work to truly leverage AI capabilities?
This disconnect is one of the biggest sources of friction and lost productivity in organizations today. The research is quite stark: 89% of companies have updated fewer than half of their jobs to reflect AI capabilities. So you have employees using 2025 tools within 2015 job descriptions. It’s like giving a Formula 1 engine to someone who only knows how to drive a horse and cart. The friction comes from confusion over responsibilities, inefficient workflows, and a constant need for rework because the role isn’t designed to leverage the technology’s strengths. The CHRO must lead the charge here. The first step is to conduct a work-design audit, identifying which tasks are being automated and what new human capabilities are needed. Second, they must partner with business leaders to redefine roles—not just job descriptions—around outcomes, focusing on skills like judgment, strategic thinking, and collaboration. Finally, they need to build the infrastructure to support this, including new performance metrics, learning pathways for upskilling, and a communication strategy that brings employees along on the journey.
As AI commoditizes technical tasks, uniquely human skills like judgment and discernment become more valuable. How can organizations intentionally cultivate these critical “judgment muscles” across the workforce to combat low-quality AI outputs and ensure humans remain in control of high-stakes decisions?
Cultivating these “judgment muscles” has to be an intentional, organization-wide effort; it won’t happen by accident. Historically, these skills were developed over years, even decades, of experience. We no longer have that luxury. The first step is to build awareness of the problem, to train employees to recognize the “AI slop” and not just accept machine-generated work at face value. The second step involves creating practical learning experiences. This could include simulation-based training where employees are given AI-generated reports and have to critique them, identify biases, and make high-stakes decisions based on imperfect data. Another powerful method is mentorship, pairing less experienced employees with senior leaders who can model what good judgment and discernment look like in practice. It’s also critical to change how we measure performance. Instead of rewarding pure speed or volume of output, we must start rewarding the quality of decisions, the ability to ask insightful questions, and the courage to challenge an AI-generated recommendation when it feels wrong.
The CHRO’s role is shifting from historical reporting to real-time scenario modeling. Beyond just providing data, how can HR leaders use these tools to interpret context, anticipate business needs, and present leaders with viable options during critical moments like restructuring or business pivots?
This is where the CHRO truly evolves from a functional leader to a strategic advisor. In the past, if a CEO was considering a restructure, HR would spend weeks pulling historical headcount and cost data. Today, the expectation is to model different scenarios live in the meeting. But the real value isn’t in the speed or the data itself; it’s in the interpretation. A strategic CHRO doesn’t just present a spreadsheet. They anticipate the critical business questions before they’re asked: What skills will we need in each scenario? What is the impact on employee morale and retention? How do we manage the change to maintain productivity? They use the modeling tools to frame the narrative, presenting leaders not with a static report, but with a set of viable, thoughtfully considered options, each with its own set of trade-offs between growth, cost, and workforce sustainability. This proactive, contextualized guidance is what elevates HR’s influence during the moments that matter most.
As companies move toward smaller, fluid teams augmented by AI agents, the nature of management changes. What new responsibilities fall on managers, and how should leaders adapt their style to guide teams effectively when work itself is constantly being redefined?
In this new environment, the manager’s role shifts dramatically from being an overseer of tasks to a coach and a cultivator of talent. With AI handling much of the routine monitoring and output, new responsibilities emerge. First, managers become “sense-makers,” helping their teams navigate the constant ambiguity and change. They must be experts at providing context and maintaining trust when roles and processes are in flux. Second, they become skills architects, constantly identifying the evolving capabilities their team needs and connecting them with the right resources to develop them. Finally, their focus must shift to fostering the very human skills AI cannot replicate: curiosity, creativity, and emotional intelligence. This requires a leadership style that is less directive and more Socratic—one that values asking the right questions over having all the answers, and that creates psychological safety for experimentation and learning.
What is your forecast for the role of the CHRO in 2026?
By 2026, I believe we will see a clear and undeniable split in the effectiveness and influence of CHROs. One group will remain focused on operational excellence, using AI primarily as a tool for efficiency and cost-cutting. They will see their roles become increasingly commoditized. The other group, however, will have fully embraced their position as architects of the human-AI partnership. These leaders will be masters of change leadership, combining a deep understanding of AI’s capabilities with an even deeper understanding of human motivation and organizational dynamics. They won’t just be reporting on the workforce; they will be actively designing the organizational structures, skill pathways, and leadership styles needed to thrive. The CHROs who succeed will be those who see AI not as a replacement for people, but as a catalyst to unlock their strategic advantage, ultimately proving that the most advanced technology is only as powerful as the human leadership guiding it.
