In modern HR, there are a few truths we often treat as self-evident, especially when it comes to the chief human resources officer role.

We believe, for example, that:

• The CHRO is increasingly a stable, long-tenured transformation leader, guiding organizations through multiyear AI adoption and workforce reinvention.
• And after years of progress, the role now commands a secure and respected seat at the C-suite table, standing alongside CFOs, CIOs, and other business leaders — if not always in compensation, then certainly in share of voice and influence.
• And as the most gender-diverse position in the C-suite, the rise of the CHRO also signals meaningful progress in leadership diversity and impact.
• Today’s CHROs reach the top HR role with the capabilities, time horizon and organizational support required to navigate a rapidly evolving, AI-driven labor landscape. And once there, clear pathways increasingly open into broader enterprise leadership roles, including COO, CEO or general management positions.

But as we head into 2026, it seems that these apparently self-evident truths are, at best, far more complicated than many of us believe. At worst, they’re based on assumptions that are overly optimistic or simply untrue.

My firm partnered with Findem to produce a deep analysis of more than 25,000 CHRO profiles, a survey of nearly 200 current CHROs and over 50 face-to-face interviews. What we found is that life as a CHRO is unusually complex right now — and the lived experience of the role contradicts many of the assumptions outlined above. Behind the headlines and conference keynotes sits a reality defined by a set of persistent paradoxes.

The transformation paradox

CHROs are expected to drive rapid, enterprise-wide transformation while also safeguarding long-term culture. Yet many do not remain in the role long enough to see that change fully embedded. While 86% of surveyed CHROs say their role is changing “significantly” or “dramatically,” average tenure has fallen from six years to just 4.8.

Why it matters: High turnover raises a fundamental question about the durability of transformation efforts when their primary sponsors exit before outcomes are fully realized.

The influence paradox

CHROs are more visible and strategically involved than ever, with more than 6 in 10 viewing themselves as peers to other C-suite leaders. Yet formal power has not always kept pace with expectations.

Why it matters: Only 12% rank among the five highest-paid executives, and many still report needing to “influence without authority” to secure commitment to people strategies — undermining their ability to lead at scale.

The diversity paradox

At 68% female representation, the CHRO role is the most gender-diverse position in the C-suite — a clear positive. However, progress on ethnic diversity remains uneven.

Read the full article here.