When CEOs Talk Tough, What Should HR Leaders Bring to the Conversation?

Remember the days when CEOs spoke honeyed words about the irreplaceability of great talent and promised to shield workers from burnout and grinding daily trips to the office?Now, however, the tone of employee relations has changed. One after the other, CEOs march through our news feeds, declaring that employees are acting entitled, resistant to change, and dispensable. Reddit’s CEO has accused employees of not working hard and Uber’s CEO recently joined a growing cohort of executives who have told employees to return to the office or beat it. Amazon CEO Andy Jassy, for his part, ordered workers back to the office five days a week, said AI will shrink the workforce, and that employees had better figure out “how to get more done with scrappier teams.” Earlier this year, Shopify’s chief executive told employees not to request new hires unless they can prove AI can’t do the job.With prominent CEOs going rogue from the chorus of empathy, how can chief HR officers adapt to the new tone? To some degree, CEOs are being transparent about new economic realities. But when executives are feeling like they can shrug off pressure to consider worker well-being or make good on prior commitments, what is a CHRO to do? This is where CHROs can be caught in the middle. Their role is help promote organizational success, but part of that mission is to make their company a great place to work. CHROs occupy a vital role in the C-suite, serving as liaison between employers and the employed, and as a result, a cooperative CHRO-CEO relationship is required. In fact, a change in CEO leads to the exit of nearly three-quarters of CHROs, said Rosanna Trasatti, CEO at Eleva Executive Leadership Advisory, during Fortune’s recent Workplace Innovation Summit. For the newest generation of CHROs, part of the job is making top executives palatable to employees and to the public. The head of HR is “one of the few people at an organization who has both the legitimacy and the duty to provide feedback to the CEO when their behavior goes against stated organizational values,” Alex Kirss of Gartner told From Day One. Kirss, who leads the CHRO-effectiveness research team in Gartner's HR practice, added: “The CHRO’s role is not to be a disciplinarian, but rather a coach to help their CEO be the best version of themselves.” Unless there’s a clear ethical violation that a company’s board of directors needs to know about, Kirss said, feedback to the CEO should be private and confidential. Then, the CHRO should give the CEO some space to reflect and pick out what they’ll do next.In many cases, CEOs will listen to feedback from their C-suite colleagues and employees at large. When the companies Klarna and Duolingo said they would begin replacing employees with artificial intelligence, the idea was so unpopular that both CEOs reversed course, at least in part. Earlier this year, JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon apologized for cursing in an in town hall meeting while expressing his annoyance at organized resistance to his RTO edicts. While high-profile CEOs may be vocal, but “our research shows that 95% of CEOs prefer to stay out of the limelight,” said Josh Bersin, the HR analyst and CEO of the Josh Bersin Co.On the other hand, some notable CEOs have simply rejected dissent. Bloomberg columnist Beth Kowitt noted that quashing dissent has been added back into the playbook. Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon has reportedly ousted his critics of his leadership style and Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg is supposedly uninterested in hearing input from employees.The CEO Class Already Has a Mistrust Issue With the PublicThe viral reaction to a moment captured on video last week, when tech CEO Andy Byron was seen on a concert “kiss cam” embracing his chief people officer Kristin Cabot, underscored the rising public mistrust of C-suite leadership right now. When the episode prompted scrutiny of Byron's track record as a corporate leader, a checkered past emerged. As chief revenue officer for a previous employer, Cybereason, “multiple former employees said Mr. Byron would lash out against employees who disagreed with him, including threatening to fire them. ‘You couldn’t challenge him,’ a former employee who worked for Mr. Byron said,” as reported at the time in The Information, a tech-industry journal.Indeed, part of the public response to the moment seemed to be fueled by a growing trust gap between corporate executives and the general public, Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, a professor of management at Yale University, told the Wall Street Journal. “There’s a certain schadenfreude associated with this,” he said. “Here’s a takedown of the ‘haves’ versus the ‘have nots.’”Where does this mean we stand in employee relations, between the cycle of threats vs. rapprochement? Some observers wonder if we’re witnessing the end of corporate empathy—at least for now. The balance of power is changing hands, and for the most part, employers are getting their druthers. “The shift in tone marks a shift in power now that companies are shrinking their white-collar staff. With jobs harder to find, many workers are seeing perks disappear and their grievances ignored,” wrote Chip Cutter in the Journal.How new is the tough talk in corporate America? “I’m not clear how much changed in the first place,” said Alison Taylor, NYU professor and author of Higher Ground: How Business Can Do the Right Thing in a Turbulent World, in a call with From Day One. “I think what we’re really doing is speaking the quiet part out loud.”The Trump Factor in Executive ToneMuch of the current condescension among some CEOs seems licensed by President Trump, who has attacked the integrity and competence of his own workers, describing the more than 2 million federal workers as “replaceable.” This is not the tone CEO have traditionally embraced. “CEOs live pretty scripted professional lives. They’re trained to tell investors nothing, read prepared texts for town halls, and stick to talking points on TV,” the journalist Liz Hoffman wrote in a Semafor Business newsletter earlier this year. “Now they see Trump speaking freely, and with few consequences … corporate America is unshackled, and the mics are everywhere.”The Trump factor has applied not just to tone but to substance as well. Take, for example, the very public tarnishing of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Since Trump signed an executive order prohibiting DEI programs in federal agencies and government contractors, many huge  companies, including Walmart and Target have scrubbed mentions of DEI from their career pages or publicly announced retirement of the programs. For many executives, however, DEI is problematic only in name. “In my experience, here’s what most CEOs believe to be true: a diverse and engaged workforce is good for business; talking about DEI externally is not,” wrote Fortune’s Diane Brady in the CEO Daily newsletter. “Though plenty of companies have publicly disavowed their DEI initiatives, other leaders are wondering how to quietly continue building a workforce that reflects their values in this climate.”Cosmetics company E.L.F Beauty is doubling down on its DEI efforts, with CEO Tarang Amin appearing on CNN to talk about their commitment. And Dimon of JPMorgan, appears unintimidated by activist investors intent on challenging the company’s DEI programs. “Bring them on,” he said in an interview with CNBC at Davos this year.In this environment, CHROs will need to choose their battles when it comes to managing their CEOs. Those HR leaders, Bersin said, will have to take “a more proactive role in executive coaching, crisis management, and internal communications.” Mitigating reputational risks will take stronger governance structures and messaging plans. His guidance: What CEOs say publicly should be well-considered about reflecting the company’s values. Since companies wield a great amount of influence in individuals’ lives, they will be called on to respond to a growing mix of economic, political, and environmental pressures. Responding in a careful way will call for new corporate initiatives and management skills. “These are still companies full of real human beings who are a mix of opinions and races and genders,” Taylor said. “Some of them are going to be affected by some of these decisions, and they’re going to be looking, in many cases, to their employer for protection, for advice, for policies–for all sorts of things.”Emily McCrary-Ruiz-Esparza is an independent journalist and From Day One contributing editor who writes about business and the world of work. Her work has appeared in the Economist, the BBC, The Washington Post, Inc., and Business Insider, among others. She is the recipient of a Virginia Press Association award for business and financial journalism.(Featured photo: Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi, who told his workers this year that they can go elsewhere if they don't like his RTO changes, at a conference in 2023. AP photo by Eric Risberg)