For all the concern about AI taking over jobs, an equally pressing question has arisen: Who’ll fill the jobs that still call for human workers? A growing, global talent shortage presents a major threat to businesses across all sectors, countries, and continents. Energy companies don’t have enough green-skilled workers, professional services firms can’t find accountants, and manufacturers are struggling to fill roles on the shop floor.

Despite the desperate need for workers, talent acquisition teams report being asked to cut costs and do more with less. Human resources may have moved into the C-suite as a strategic contributor, but not everyone in the department has a seat at the decision-making table. According to new research from the Josh Bersin Co., just 32% of talent acquisition leads feel that they’re strategic contributors to the business. Corporate plans change too quickly, they say, if there is a plan at all, and executives treat workforce planning as an afterthought. Right now, Labor Department statistics show overall job growth slowing more than expected, but employers need to take a long-term view. 

The problem, HR analyst Josh Bersin told From Day One, is that “workforce planning isn’t a very strategic process. It’s a once-a-year budget exercise. And when there’s a bad quarter, the company looks at the workforce and says, ‘Freeze the headcount over here, freeze the headcount over there.’”

For some business leaders, hiring and firing are reflexes, not strategies. The cycle is so predictable that a 2023 story in the Harvard Business Review advised employees to assess their job security by checking their company’s quarterly filings. A bad quarter foreshadows layoffs.

Companies can no longer afford to run their recruitment departments like e-commerce warehouses, Bersin argues. And unless leaders start taking it seriously, businesses won’t be able to outrun the talent shortage.

Updating Antiquated Talent Acquisition Models

There are two types of TA departments, said Bersin: Operational and strategic. The former works like a fulfillment center. A requisition is opened, recruiters source candidates, conduct interviews, present options to managers, and complete the hire. “They’re operationally measured and operationally configured. They look at cost-of-hire, they look at channels and sources, they outsource a lot of stuff, and they design around scale,” Bersin said. 

The strategic TA team works differently. When someone wants to open a req, they ask questions: Who do you want to hire? What skills should they have? How will they contribute to the business? Is there someone internal who can fill the role? Could the responsibilities of this role be automated?

If a talent acquisition team isn’t strategic, it’s not necessarily their fault, according to Gina Larson, an HR consultant with more than a decade of experience in HR and talent development. “It’s the direction of the business, the remit that they’re given, and the control that they have” that determines how strategic they can be, she said. “Most companies aren’t set up to invest time and energy into developing more diverse and non-traditional hires that would bring the company into the future.”

When Bersin’s company surveyed business leaders about their views of TA, 55% of the respondents said they see the function as an integral part of the organization, but it appears they haven’t learned to treat it that way, and they continue to set the wrong expectations. Old habits die hard, it seems.

If executives think recruiters are order-takers, then that’s what they’ll be, Larson said. “We all report to someone. Short-term results typically get the rewards. If you’re struggling for a while and you say, ‘Just trust me, we have long-term results coming,’ it’s hard. Everyone has a stakeholder, and I think there is the pressure of short-term results.”

Operational teams are a vestige of an outdated philosophy that equates headcount with revenue, one that prioritizes cost-to-hire and time-to-hire above all else, Bersin said. Companies that run operational TA teams are typically ones that put the business–and its workers–at the mercy of market swings. 

“The financial pressures on companies these days are so quarterly-based,” Bersin said. “I think CEOs and CFOs have to deal with this very short-term mentality in their investor base. A lot of companies over-hire and then lay people off, and then over-hire and lay people off. What I call ‘enduring companies’ don’t think that way. They ignore those signals and think about long-term, sustainable growth.” When Bersin’s company asked TA leaders to identify the biggest barriers to becoming a strategic business partner, 36% said that shifting business priorities is obstacle No. 1.

Talent Acquisition and the Future of Business

It seems that no industry is safe from the skills shortage. In the energy sector, imperatives to develop next-generation technologies mean companies need workers with green-energy skills, but seven in every eight workers globally have no green skills to speak of, according to research from LinkedIn. In 2023 the World Economic Forum declared the talent shortage “the next energy crisis.”

Companies ranging from auto parts retailers to biotech companies blame financial-reporting problems on the lack of accountants, a shortage so severe that industry-regulating bodies are considering cutting certification requirements for the role. Meanwhile, consulting firm Korn Ferry estimates that the media and telecoms industry is on track to “hit a wall” with a shortage of 4.3 million workers by 2030, and manufacturing is forecasted to have 2.1 million empty jobs by then.

Korn Ferry projects that, globally, the shortage of skilled workers will result in more than 85 million empty jobs by the end of the decade. Fifty-seven percent of respondents to the Bersin Co. survey said that it’s the skills shortage that will present the biggest challenge to the TA field in the next 12 months. 

Some companies are thinking strategically, however. Talent intelligence, as it’s situated in HR, is an increasingly influential discipline, Bersin said. That’s typically led by a data-wielding analyst who advises HR on where to look for the best candidates, what cities they live in, and which schools they graduate from, even the companies they work for. Some companies, like Aon, have invested in apprenticeship programs that train unskilled workers into highly skilled ones. PwC is trying to influence college curriculums to create more accountants. 

Talent acquisition just can’t afford to work on the sidelines, said Kumud Sharma, chief people officer at financial advisory firm Betterment. Her recruiters work cross-functionally, getting to know all parts of the business. Otherwise, how will they show candidates what the company can offer them?

Sharma remembers when talent acquisition was its own entity outside of HR–working like a restaurant window. A hiring manager filled out a form requesting one engineer, and recruiting served up one engineer. But that doesn’t work anymore–because we know better, she said. “We’re not thinking of people as widgets anymore. We’re not thinking of people as products. We’re thinking of people as people now.” It’s this change in thinking that has changed the HR profession altogether.

“For 30 years or so, we have been saying that people are the assets of the organization. Who’s bringing those assets in? Those assets are coming through talent acquisition,” said Sharma. “How can that not be a strategic function?”

Emily McCrary-Ruiz-Esparza is a freelance journalist and From Day One contributing editor who writes about work, the job market, and women’s experiences in the workplace. Her work has appeared in the Economist, the BBC, The Washington Post, Quartz, and Fast Company.

(Featured photo by Izusek/iStock by Getty Images)