As strategy grows more complex and execution cycles shorten, the CHRO can no longer be viewed as a facilitator of culture or a steward of engagement. The future of the role lies in system ownership.

Organizations don’t fail to execute because they lack alignment—they fail because no one is structurally responsible for enforcing behavior at scale. While CFOs forecast capital and COOs manage operations, few executives are accountable for how human behavior is sustained across the enterprise. That gap is where performance dies.

The modern CHRO must step into a new mandate: to design, diagnose, and enforce the systems that translate strategy into consistent, measurable behavior. This isn’t a branding exercise for HR. It’s an operating requirement for the business.

Layoffs don’t just impact headcount—they reshape trust, culture, and execution. This article outlines how CEOs can lead layoffs strategically, protect organizational credibility, and avoid long-term damage to performance and morale.

Inclusion is failing—because caring isn’t enough.

Too many organizations are stuck in a cycle of symbolic DEI efforts that don’t align with performance or business outcomes. The result? High potential talent walks out the door, while inclusion initiatives stay disconnected from the systems that drive real change.

To create lasting impact, inclusion must be built into the very architecture of leadership, decision-making, and performance. It’s time to stop hoping and start leading with measurable, outcome-driven strategies.

This is why you must make the shift.

The Ulrich model wasn’t just a product of its time—it was a strategic failure from the start. CEOs didn’t just inherit it. They endorsed it. Scaled it. Protected it. And in doing so, they built HR systems optimized for compliance, not leadership.

Now, in a world defined by volatility, complexity, and cultural pressure, those same systems are collapsing under weight they were never designed to carry.
This isn’t an HR problem. It’s an executive decision that needs to be undone.

“It’s not burnout. It’s betrayal.”

That’s what one CHRO told us behind closed doors.

Not betrayal by leadership—but by the system. The HR structures still protecting alignment while trust quietly erodes. The performance reviews rewarding silence. The culture programs that ask for change without ever redesigning power.

This article goes beyond theory. It exposes what CEOs and CHROs are finally saying off the record—and what must come next.

Read the full piece →

Most companies are making the wrong people own the most important decision—who gets hired.

HR may run the process, but it’s your managers who live with the outcome. So why are they the last to meet the candidate?

Hiring isn’t a paperwork task. It’s a leadership act.
And every time you let HR decide who moves forward, you’re outsourcing accountability—and inviting underperformance.

Read: Why Managers Should Own Hiring—Not HR.

Companies don’t need an HR department.
They need HR capability—and the courage to redesign the system.

HR departments manage risk.
HR capability drives performance.

If no one owns the people system, your culture isn’t broken—it’s leaderless.

Read: Why Companies Do Not Need an HR Department.

Moderna’s decision to merge its HR and tech departments is being hailed as innovative—but it reveals a deeper problem. Without redesigning HR’s structural role, AI integration risks scaling dysfunction, not solving it. This article challenges the illusion of transformation and makes the case for redefining HR as a center of power, not just process.

Most managers don’t fail because they’re incapable. They fail because the authority they appeared to hold was never theirs to begin with. In organizations that reward loyalty over leadership and alignment over authorship, borrowed authority thrives. It performs well—until the scaffolding disappears. And then, quietly, the system begins to stall. This isn’t a talent issue. It’s a design flaw. One that costs you culture, credibility, and your best people.

For nearly three decades, the Ulrich HR model has been treated as gospel. It gave HR structure, language, and legitimacy in the boardroom. But it also quietly buried HR’s moral authority. Today, we’re asking DEI leaders to dismantle systemic inequality using a model designed to serve the very structures they need to disrupt. That’s not just ineffective—it’s negligent. The truth is this: DEI isn’t broken. The HR model it’s trapped inside is. And if we want real change, we need to stop optimizing what should be replaced. That’s why we built The HR Power Model™—not to modernize Ulrich’s legacy, but to replace it entirely.

Most CHROs weren’t hired to redesign the system—they were hired to protect it. The Ulrich model gave HR structure, but it quietly disempowered the function. It taught HR to align, not to intervene. What we need now isn’t refinement. It’s replacement.

In this new article, I introduce The HR Power Model™—a bold redesign of HR’s role, authority, and purpose. This isn’t about influence. It’s about power. And we’re done asking for permission.

Most CEOs don’t realize they’ve hired the wrong CHRO—until it’s too late.
Engagement scores drop. High performers exit quietly. Culture feels compliant, not alive. And the person you trusted to protect your people? They’re busy protecting the system that’s breaking them.

You didn’t need a strategic partner. You needed a cultural insurgent.

This is the story of how most companies lose their edge—and how one hire can take it back.Read the article: The CEO’s Guide to Hiring a CHRO – Why Your Next HR Leader Can’t Look Anything Like Your Last One.

For over two decades, HR leaders were told that the David Ulrich HR model was the key to strategic influence. Instead, it splintered the profession into powerless roles, buried culture risk under compliance checklists, and turned HR into a polite observer of organizational decay.

The truth? The Ulrich model didn’t evolve HR—it anesthetized it. And while culture crumbled, no one in the profession had the courage to say what was obvious: the model failed, and we’re still living with the consequences.

If you’ve felt like you’re doing everything right but still being sidelined—this is the conversation you’ve been waiting for.

Stephen Covey told us to seek win-win. Xi Jinping just proved that’s a fantasy.

In a world of hypercompetition, asymmetrical power, and strategic dominance, “mutual benefit” isn’t leadership—it’s denial. Covey’s model was built for trust-based stability. Today’s leaders face volatility, geopolitical realignment, and breakneck complexity.

If you’re still managing with a model that assumes fairness, you’re not leading—you’re being played.

It’s time to bury win-win.
And build the kind of leadership that survives what’s actually coming.

Most leaders don’t fire underperformers—they quietly push them out. No confrontation. No paperwork. Just silence, sidelining, and slowly eroding trust. We call it Managerial Erosion™, and it’s costing organizations their best people without ever triggering an HR review. This article exposes the hidden behaviors behind quiet firing—and what bold leaders must do to stop it.

Most teams don’t fail because of dysfunction. They fail because the system rewards silence, punishes dissent, and confuses harmony with performance.

Lencioni’s Five Dysfunctions of a Team gave us a story we wanted to believe—that trust and vulnerability could fix broken teams. But in today’s high-velocity, high-stakes environment, that narrative no longer holds.

In this article, we expose the blind spot in one of leadership’s most beloved models—and reveal what teams actually need to thrive now.

Read why emotional trust isn’t enough—and how to build teams that scale courage, clarity, and truth.

Trust-Based Diversity” promised a softer DEI. What it delivered was silence in a new disguise. This isn’t a rebrand. It’s a repeat. And it’s still failing. In this manifesto, Jim Woods breaks down why the current reform efforts won’t save inclusion—and how The Trust Imperative™ replaces compliance culture with principled leadership that actually performs.

Traditional DEI and anti-racism training often divides and discourages trust. This article explores how to build inclusive, high-performance cultures through trust-first leadership, without shame or fear.

Most companies don't have a retention problem—they have a management tolerance problem.

When we analyze why top talent leaves, compensation rarely makes the top five. It’s the manager. Always the manager.

The data is conclusive: 70% of engagement variance ties directly to the quality of the manager. And yet, many organizations continue to coach the uncoachable, train the unwilling, and promote the unqualified.

You can’t fix a bad manager. You can only replace them—with someone who was built to lead in the first place.

Embracing Disruption for Organizational Resilience

In today’s fast-paced business environment, stability is a misnomer. At Seattle Consulting Group, our Resilient Disruption Model (RDM) empowers organizations to thrive by embracing, rather than avoiding, disruption. Companies like Spotify and Square exemplify this approach, transforming industries through innovation and adaptability. The RDM equips leaders to turn volatility into growth, fostering a culture of agility and continuous reinvention. In a world where change is constant, RDM offers a pathway to long-term success.