The HR profession suffers from success blindness

The year 2026 is here. Where does the HR profession stand now?

As an HR thinker, I like to push the boundaries of the profession, mainly with the aim of gaining a better understanding of the internal contradictions in our operations. I see that mainstream thinking eliminates the possibility of critical thinking and treats temporarily dominant and hyped best practices and solutions as self-evident. The profession is currently suffering from a blindness to success, which manifests itself in complacent professional stupor. We constantly rejoice in brandable successes, (fake) awards, and partial results that have no real impact or power to solve current social problems and crises. It is well known that there are many accumulated social and environmental problems that manifest themselves as a polycrisis and burden the lives of organizations. Yet the responsibility is not small, as the HR population is responsible for the quality of life of 70% of the domestic workforce, which represents approximately 3.3 million people.

We have talked a lot about how HR is increasingly moving from an administrative function to a strategic role. In reality, this has not happened: HR continues to play an operational and implementing role. HR has little business knowledge, is constantly reactive to organizational changes and dynamics, and the HR controlling function does not really serve business decisions. 

I also see that, along with high employment rates and international migration, not only the quality of other professions but also the capabilities and problem-solving power of the HR profession are weakening and crumbling. 

It is important to emphasize that a real HR strategy is performed by a function that can convert short-term thinking and decisions and their effects into long-term ones through its lobbying power. This rarely happens, as the nature of organizational hierarchy dictates that HR professionals are good when they adapt to the status quo and become management executors, rather than when they resist in any form.  

We tend to jump on the bandwagon of the latest buzzwords, dissect them, and analyze them ad infinitum. For example, managing generational differences is all the rage right now. However, we don't talk about the studies that show that it makes no sense to manage and fragment the workforce using a generational approach. 

Or I could mention wellbeing as a branding tool: everyone is introducing trendy programs, masking the fact that most burnout, psychosocial stress, mental exhaustion, isolation, alienation, discomfort, dissatisfaction, existential uncertainty, etc. are produced and intensified within the fabric of the organization. 

Employer branding, or marketing the employer brand, has been with us for at least a decade, but it tends to mislead rather than guide employees and job seekers. In a highly competitive environment, we want to use spectacular image videos and exaggerated experiences to make something interesting that is not interesting in this form. When branding, we often make jobs and positions attractive and transform the world of work into an experience, which means that we do not offer real value to applicants and may even undermine our credibility. 

These buzzwords are products of the culture industry, enriching the world of work and life with the experience of marketability.  In many cases, they market and sell appearances rather than real content and value.

How do you assess the past year? What lessons have you learned?

As a member of the board of OHE (National Human Resource Management Association – ed.), I have insight into the operations of many companies, and it is well known that the recession in the automotive industry has clearly been a challenging year for the supply chain. This means that the decline in orders has created enormous pressure to cut costs. Profit targets could only be achieved through cost optimization. The intensity of growth declined, which required a quick and careful adjustment of staffing policies. The mapping and mobilization of the internal labor market was also intense, which prompted and mobilized talent and succession planning.  In order to reduce skill and competency gaps, retraining was continuously organized for business objectives and, most notably, for technical projects. 

What are your expectations for 2026?

The number and speed of changes continue to accelerate, and organizations and HR must adapt accordingly. We are facing an increasingly turbulent period: overlapping crises, an unpredictable economic environment, and multifaceted business challenges are shaping operating conditions. At the same time, the expectations and administrative pressures generated by EU directives are also increasing, whether in terms of ESG obligations, wage transparency, or compliance issues. These are not just legal or administrative tasks, but also have a direct impact on organizational operations and culture. Amidst all this, renewing HR competencies is becoming a key issue, particularly in the areas of adaptability, systemic thinking, and solution-oriented operation. The goal is not simply to keep up with change, but to enable HR to increase organizational flexibility and business and human value.  In the coming year, only those companies will remain truly competitive and adaptable, whose HR functions as a strategic competency capable of renewal, rather than a mere function, .

How do you try to protect yourself from burnout?

I am not only active as an HR manager, but also as a member of the board of the OHE professional organization, playing an active role in the association's programs and events. I regularly write HR essays exploring the boundaries of the HR profession. My goal in writing is to broaden the current narrow professional imagination, thereby strengthening the vitality of the profession and supporting it in preparing for the challenges of the future. These three roles in themselves make my work more colorful, which helps prevent burnout. When I'm not working, I recharge my batteries with running, fitness, books, and my children.

What skills will definitely be needed in 2026?

I would highlight adaptive and critical thinking. In a period of simultaneous uncertainties, such as polycrises (ecological, economic, health, energy, etc.) and rapid technological development, adaptive agility is the key to survival. The rapid replacement of outdated knowledge with new knowledge is a crucial competency. It matters greatly how quickly and effectively an organization can override ineffective routines, systemic habits, and learned helplessness. Critical thinking skills also precede and support adaptive thinking and functioning. The HR profession has a lot of room for improvement in this area, as critical thinking also undermines the infallibility of the profession. The ability to think critically not only deepens knowledge, but more importantly, it highlights system-critical relationships and connections that bring multiple operational and competitive advantages to the organization. The company that wins is the one that can change quickly, i.e., has high learning agility. Learning agility is the ability that allows an organization to treat uncertainty not as a risk but as an opportunity for development.

What HR activities would you entrust to AI - and what would you never entrust to it?

AI is an excellent tool for analysis, reporting, information gathering, and presentation preparation, and I also use it to save myself a lot of administrative work. Like digitalization, AI also has a "slave-freeing" function, so let's put it to work as much as possible and hand over routine and monotonous tasks and operations to it. At the same time, at its current level of maturity, it cannot make final decisions on issues that affect human relationships, destinies, trust, or the deeper layers of organizational culture. AI should be asked to analyze, structure, provide alternatives, show patterns, and prioritize options - but the responsibility for decision-making remains with humans for the time being. This is particularly important in areas such as selection, promotion, performance evaluation, and conflict management. In these situations, correct interpretation of data is not enough; value-based judgment, empathy, context sensitivity, and consensus are also needed. Decisions about people must continue to be made by people. At the same time, AI can have significant positive benefits: it can reduce biases, including the influence of nepotism, personal sympathy, or informal relationships. If used correctly, it can help ensure that jobs and appointments are increasingly decided on the basis of actual performance, professional knowledge, and skills - in other words, it can strengthen meritocratic practices. Overall, AI can be an excellent HR assistant: fast, consistent, tireless, but it can never replace the human conscience of HR.

To read the Hungarian version click here.