According to Inc, an e-commerce company’s AI agent handling customer refunds approved a staggering $2 million more than company policy allowed, a failure that exposed a critical accountability gap. Marketing firm Xponent21 has appointed a chief work officer to bridge this divide, while at ServiceNow, Chief Human Resources Officer Jacqui Canney also became chief AI enablement officer, leading to 92% staff adoption of their AI co-pilot within six months. At Asana, a joint AI Council run by the CIO and Head of People helped shift employee sentiment, with 61% of staff reporting increased AI enthusiasm after six months of tiered training. Furthermore, McKinsey analysis indicates misaligned incentives cause a 20-30% loss of value from enterprise tech spend, and some predict a new chief productivity officer role may replace traditional HR by 2026 as companies like Moderna merge HR and IT under unified leadership.
The Invisible Accountability Gap
Here’s the thing: companies are great at assigning ownership for outcomes, like profit or a product line. But the actual work—the messy mix of people, software, and process—often floats in a no-man’s-land between HR and IT. That was fine when tech was just a tool, like a spreadsheet. But modern AI is different. It’s not just assisting; it’s doing significant chunks of the work. So when that e-commerce AI went rogue and approved $2 million in extra refunds, who was really at fault? The CFO fixed the numbers. The CIO fixed the code. But the broken handoff between human judgment and machine speed? Nobody owned that. And that’s the dangerous gap where speed amplifies errors and accountability just evaporates.
The New Org Chart Fix
So, how are companies trying to solve this? They’re experimenting with three main models, and the choice depends on your company’s culture. The boldest move is creating a totally new role, like the Chief Work Officer, who owns the blend of organizational design and tech. It’s a dedicated owner for the human-machine workflow. The second model is expanding an existing role’s mandate. ServiceNow’s Jacqui Canney is the prime example—CHRO and Chief AI Enablement Officer. As discussed on the Josh Bersin podcast, this only works if you close a massive capability gap: either HR learns AI ops, or IT learns people science. The third way is the cross-functional council, like at Asana. It’s less about a single owner and more about forcing HR and IT to act as one team, which Asana found critical for managing both AI enthusiasts and skeptics.
Why This Is An HR Reckoning
This isn’t just a tech problem. It’s forcing a fundamental evolution of HR itself. Work has always been “socio-technical,” but the technical side is now an active, thinking participant. That’s why a company like Moderna has already merged HR and IT under one leader. The prediction that a “Chief Productivity Officer” might replace the traditional HR director by 2026 makes a brutal kind of sense. The function that manages human capital simply can’t operate in a vacuum anymore, separate from the systems that define how work gets done. If your tools are intelligent, your people strategy and tech deployment have to be fused. This is a massive shift, and many legacy organizations are completely unprepared for it.
The Two Metrics That Matter
Now, all this restructuring needs a goal. The article argues you need to optimize two things in tandem: system flow and human flourishing. Think of it like this. You can optimize a factory line for pure speed (flow), but if you burn out the workers (flourishing), the system collapses. Conversely, you can make people super happy, but if the workflow is broken, nothing gets done. The magic—and the exponential payoff—happens when both move together. This isn’t just feel-good stuff; it’s backed by organizational psychology and, frankly, good sense. A focus on workplace well-being and smart tech design aren’t in conflict. They’re two sides of the same coin. Get it right, and your AI isn’t just a faster tool; it’s a true force multiplier built on human needs, not in spite of them.
