In recent years, I have seen how artificial intelligence has gained a lot of space in Human Resources conversations. In executive committees, in strategic presentations, in projects that promise to transform the function. In most cases, the focus is on automation: faster processes, fewer manual tasks, more operational efficiency.

‍

All of this is important. But it is not enough.

‍

After more than a decade leading HR teams in international environments, with high regulatory complexity and, very often, strong social and union pressure, I learned that the real value of HR is not only in executing processes well, but in helping the organization make better decisions. And this is where AI, if well understood and well used, can create a real impact.

‍

The problem is that many AI initiatives in HR stay at the most comfortable layer: digitalizing what we were already doing before. We automate parts of recruitment, implement chatbots to answer frequent questions, create more and more sophisticated dashboards… but, in the end, we continue deciding almost in the same way.

‍

Automating is not the same as thinking better.

‍

In complex environments, where a people decision has direct impact on the business, on culture, and on the social sustainability of the company, intuition alone is not enough. But an algorithm without context is also not enough. I have lived restructuring processes, deep cultural changes, delicate collective negotiations, and crisis moments where the data was there, available, but the difference was the ability to interpret it with judgement and responsibility.

‍

AI starts to become truly strategic when it stops answering the question “how can we do this faster?” and starts answering “what is the most appropriate decision in this moment?”. It is not only about measuring turnover, absenteeism or performance, but about understanding patterns, risks and consequences before they become a real problem.

‍

For example, anticipating where leadership is weakening, identifying critical roles that concentrate high organizational risk, understanding how certain labor decisions impact the internal health of the organization, or how culture truly influences business results. This type of analysis does not replace human judgement, but it challenges it, complements it, and many times forces less comfortable decisions.

‍

This is where the role of the HR leader changes in a relevant way. It is no longer enough to be a good process manager, or to ensure regulatory compliance. Not even to simply “implement technology”. The real challenge is translating data into decisions, putting human context where models are cold, and setting clear ethical limits when technology moves faster than organizational reflection.

‍

I have seen organizations with large investments in technology that achieved no meaningful change, because decisions were still based on old habits, very hierarchical structures, or fears that no one dared to put on the table. And I have also seen teams with fewer technological resources, but with an intelligent reading of data, make much more solid and sustainable decisions over time.

‍

AI does not automatically turn HR into a strategic function. What does that is how it is used, the questions that are asked, and the courage to change decisions when data shows an uncomfortable reality.

‍

In the end, the question is not how much AI the HR function has, but how many better decisions it is helping to make. Because when HR achieves that, it stops being only a support function and truly takes the strategic place that many organizations say they want, but few are really willing to build.