ISG Software Research Analyst Perspectives

For many years, HR teams encountered an endless stream of buzzwords often intended to garner excitement about new technological developments or further evolution of the HR profession. Unfortunately, this often leads us down unproductive paths in the attempt to be part of the conversation. Often, executives and senior leaders will express a requirement to include the latest buzzwords in any software RFPs as a minimum for participation. HR teams find themselves in a position of compliance but struggle to be fully informed and educated on the what, why and how associated with the trendy topics.

Organizations are usually conflicted—wanting to remain highly relevant in technology adoption to attract next-gen talent but lacking detailed understanding and commitment to challenging misaligned business processes that can lead to successful deployment and application of said technology. While it is crucial to stay informed, HR leaders must prioritize meaningful outcomes like diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging over trend-chasing.

Buzzwords like “AI,” “machine learning” and “automation” can often dominate discussions without a deep understanding of what these technologies entail and what challenges they address. This encourages HR (and other) leaders to demand features or tools that are not fully understood, resulting in investments that do not align with enterprise needs or goals. HR teams can feel pressured by software providers and market trends to adopt the latest technologies—especially when there is a tendency for software providers to overemphasize buzzwords to ensure a perception of viability when it comes time for RFP activities to commence. Unfortunately, the marketing chatter often falls short, promising transformative results without clearly articulating how the technology aligns with business strategies or processes.

Buzzword-centric thinking can create challenges for businesses. It can minimize the importance and value of programs like DEIB, reducing them to a checkbox on the list of compliance requirements. When technology is selected based on the “shiny” features rather than its true effectiveness in alignment with business strategy and goals, it can lead to performative DEIB efforts that lack meaningful and lasting impact. In addition, chasing the buzzwords can lead to a gross misutilization of resources that can quickly translate to a loss of credibility for HR. Instead, teams should focus on what matters most for the business and workers and seek to understand where technology innovations can lend a helping hand to enable an elevated experience.

Throughout my career, I have experienced this challenge from multiple vantage points—buyer/owner of the technology, leader of the function(s), consumer of the experience, seller/provider of the technology, and now through the lens of an analyst of software to support the needs of HR. Time and time again, enterprises create the same unnecessary obstacles for the workforce by chasing buzzwords without a solid plan of action. I’ve heard countless tales from HR professionals about forced RFP requirements tied to the latest buzzwords with no clear understanding of how the “it thing” will impact the teams managing the software, the workers interacting with the software or the broader linkage that connects back to the strategic operating objectives.

Enterprises have long treated DEIB as a single initiative or compliance exercise, but it is deeply nuanced and should vary by company culture, industry, geography and other worker demographics. What works in one environment may not necessarily work in another. Therefore, it is critical to tailor DEIB strategies to fit the unique needs of your workforce rather than adopting generic, buzzword-driven approaches.

There is a tendency to prioritize appearances over impact—especially when pressured to present an image of inclusivity. This often leads to a surface-level adoption of DEIB initiatives with lackluster executive sponsorship, such as launching unconscious bias training or creating a diversity committee without first embedding these into the fabric of the workplace culture or goals. Technology can exacerbate this problem when selected based on flashy features that check the box for the latest buzzwords rather than aligning business processes and overall needs with functionality. For many organizations, DEIB efforts are reactive, driven by external pressures. This reactive approach, combined with buzzword-driven tech investments, limits the effectiveness of DEIB initiatives. HR leaders need to reframe DEIB as a proactive, long-term strategy tied to business goals and not just the latest market trend.

Effective DEIB programs are not just about compliance. They are critical for attracting and retaining top talent and fostering an environment rich with innovation, creativity and engagement. HR tech solutions that support DEIB can help measure and improve the quality of hiring efforts, enable sustainable, equitable pay practices and encourage a sense of belonging in the workplace. Beyond talent management, DEIB efforts tied to core business goals lead to tangible improvements in financial performance. By 2026, the majority of enterprises evaluating compensation management software will list automated pay equity modeling and anomaly detection as required system functionality.

Tech solutions that simply check the “diversity” box, however, do not contribute to this bottom-line benefit. Technology needs to enhance positive business outcomes.

 Regards,

Matthew Brown