Tech Workforce Planning

Good strategic workforce planning is different from operational planning... ...because it looks much further ahead to determine what kind of workforce is needed to deliver the company’s long-term strategy. It can be a valuable and natural extension of the business strategy that yields a major competitive advantage, positioning a firm for sustained growth and innovation, no matter the changes to come. Key takeaways on the four principles to achieve that: 💡 It is future-back, not today-forward - the best leaders take a future-back approach—they envision the distant future and then build a plan to achieve it. They understand that good strategic workforce planning often enters an uncomfortable space where some aspects of the “how” are unknown. 💡It is uneven - Successful strategic workforce planning often involves focusing differentially on a few job families—groupings of roles with reasonable skill overlaps. The best plans focus exclusively on large or scarce workforce populations that expect to see change. 💡It is learning-based - leaders can guard against incorrect assumptions by making the plan easily adaptable and updating it each year based on what they’ve learned. They will watch carefully for the right signposts and distinguish between offsetting forces (e.g. leaders might make assumptions around increasing headcount due to business growth and decreasing headcount from automation productivity gains) 💡 It is simple enough to be repeatable - When leaders make the workforce plan too granular, it becomes a bureaucratic, wasted effort that the business resents. The best processes are tied to annual strategic planning. They feel like a light addition to thinking through the strategy’s people implications. Overall: A good strategic planning thoughtfully assesses both human and financial capital. HR teams can help the business define the future at the job family level in the same way that finance supports forecasting major P&L and capital lines. #workforceplanning #strategy

TA gets blamed for slow hiring. But time-to-fill doesn't start when a recruiter picks up a requisition. It starts long before that. It starts with workforce planning. Did we identify the talent need before it became urgent? Was the headcount approved in time? Did leaders align on the business problem they're solving? Is there a clear success profile for the role? Too often, recruiting is measured on the speed of execution while the business ignores the decisions that determine whether hiring can move quickly in the first place. Talent Acquisition isn't just about filling jobs. It's a workforce strategy function. The best TA leaders don't wait for requisitions. They partner with the business on workforce planning, organizational design, succession planning, market intelligence, and talent forecasting, so hiring becomes proactive rather than reactive. When those pieces are in place, recruiting moves fast. When they aren't, no recruiter can make up six weeks of delayed planning. Maybe it's time we stop asking, "Why is recruiting so slow?" And start asking, "How effective is our workforce planning?" #TalentAcquisition #WorkforceStrategy #StrategicHiring #TalentLeadership #WorkforcePlanning #TimeToFill

Everyone is talking about AI. I think one of the bigger shifts is actually happening in workforce planning. For years, workforce planning was treated as an annual exercise focused on budgets and headcount. 𝗧𝗼𝗱𝗮𝘆, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗴𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗼𝗿𝗴𝗮𝗻𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁 𝗶𝘁 𝗮𝘀 𝗮 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗻𝘂𝗼𝘂𝘀 𝗯𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆, in my experience that shift usually starts with a different set of questions, not just "do we have the capabilities we'll need six to twelve months out," but where the critical skill gaps actually sit, which roles carry the most business risk if they're vacant, and whether we should be building that talent internally or going out to hire it. 𝗢𝗻𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗜'𝘃𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗹𝘆 𝗼𝗯𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗲𝗱: 𝗼𝗿𝗴𝗮𝗻𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘂𝗴𝗴𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗰𝗲 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘂𝘀𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻'𝘁 𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗮. 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘆'𝗿𝗲 𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗴𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. Finance sees the numbers, HR sees the people and the real value comes when those perspectives are connected to inform better business decisions, not when each function optimizes in isolation. AI is making workforce planning more predictive. 𝗕𝘂𝘁 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗱𝗶𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝘀𝗻'𝘁 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝘆. Organizations still need leaders who can translate insight into decision. To me, workforce planning isn't about filling jobs. It's about preparing the organization for the business it wants to become. 𝗧𝗵𝗮𝘁'𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝘆 𝗜 𝗯𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗲𝘃𝗲 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗰𝗲 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝘀𝗻'𝘁 𝗮𝗻 𝗛𝗥 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗼𝗿 𝗮 𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀, 𝗶𝘁'𝘀 𝗮 𝗯𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝘆 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀, 𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝘆 𝗛𝗥 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗲𝗱 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲. The real value of workforce planning isn't predicting the future perfectly. It's making better decisions before the future arrives. #WorkforcePlanning #PeopleStrategy #OrganizationalDesign

Workforce planning has always been an incredibly complex and difficult task. Despite valiant efforts to improve these models, they have remained relatively static and simplistic, relying predominantly on small teams crunching data or on predictions from the hiring manager community. In an ideal world, we would shift from a static, once-a-year exercise to a dynamic, more proactive model. We would stop reacting to what's happening now and start anticipating what's likely to happen next. Last week, I had the pleasure of spending time with our enterprise data and analytics team, a group that services over 800 customers. The most exciting topic we discussed was three pilots we're running with customers right now that aim to make this a reality: using a digital twin for work planning. It works by connecting vast amounts of external market data with a company's many internal data sources, some they typically wouldn't consider, such as ERP, CRM (sales), LMS, and Time and Attendance systems. This allows us to run scenarios and model future talent needs. Here’s a concrete example: By analyzing Salesforce, HRIS, and ATS data, we can predict that when multiple prospect opportunities reach a specific stage in our customer’s sales cycle, there is a high likelihood of winning at least one of them. We can then analyze the consistent skill sets across all of those prospect opportunities, allowing us to confidently and proactively start a recruitment process for those skills. The goal being that we have candidates at the final stages of the process, before an official requisition has been raised, positively impacting time to hire. We’ve also been able to replicate a similar model based on website sales activity. The question to ask is: what data is generated in what system that allows you to get ahead of the hiring process today. 

𝗔𝗿𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗼𝗱𝗮𝘆’𝘀 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗼𝗿 𝘆𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗱𝗮𝘆’𝘀 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘂𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲?    When I first started out in my career, the world of work looked very different.     Most people stayed in the same job – even the same company – for many years, sometimes decades. Roles were clearly defined, often with fixed hierarchies and long paper trails. Teams were almost always co-located, and workforce planning largely meant headcount forecasting based on fixed job descriptions.    Fast forward to today, and work looks nothing like that. AI advancements have reshaped entire industries. New skills are emerging in months, not years. Geopolitical shifts are affecting access to talent and cost in ways business leaders couldn’t have predicted five years ago.     But too often, workforce strategies are still rooted in that old approach, usually accompanied by long hiring cycles or rigid structures.     To truly tackle today’s challenges, strategies should be led by the outcomes the business needs to achieve – whether that’s accelerating digital transformation, expanding into new markets, or delivering complex, high-impact projects at pace.    David Barr, who leads the Robert Walters Outsourcing business, sums it up well:  "The future of workforce planning isn’t about the worker. It’s about the work that needs to be done."    This shift in mindset changes the questions leaders should be asking.     For instance, instead of asking: What roles do we need to fill?  Think about: 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘄𝗲 𝘁𝗿𝘆𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗼 𝗱𝗲𝗹𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿?    And in place of: What qualifications or experience do we need?   Consider: 𝗪𝗵𝗶𝗰𝗵 𝘀𝗸𝗶𝗹𝗹𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗰𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝘁𝗼 𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗶𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘀?  That’s where capability-led planning comes in. It can help organisations build on traditional hiring models beyond permanent and temporary by adding more flexible ways to access the skills they need – when and where they need them.      For example, say you’re looking to build a team with in-demand tech skills that are difficult to recruit for. Instead of trying to fill permanent positions, a hire-train-deploy (HTD) model can help you access early-career talent, trained specifically for your needs and ready to deliver from day one.     Or, if your team needs expert support for a critical project but adding to your headcount isn’t an option, a resource augmentation approach is a good solution. It gives you access to experienced, on-demand consultants with specialist skill sets – along with the flexibility to scale up or down as needed.      Yes, this kind of planning may take more thought upfront. But it creates a workforce strategy that can evolve as fast as the world around it.     How are you progressing your workforce strategy to meet what’s next? 

22,042 tech layoffs and accelerated hiring. At the same time. This isn't contradiction – it's strategic realignment driven by AI adoption. 📊 Carta's latest research on startup compensation & hiring tells an interesting story about which functions are thriving vs. shrinking: - 📈 Sales roles now account for 19.9% of all new hires (up from 14.8% in 2020), making it the second most common function behind engineering - 🤖 Approximately 50% of tech leaders anticipate both layoffs AND hiring in the next 6 months specifically due to AI adoption (Ernst & Young survey) - 📉 Involuntary departures down 35% from 2023 to 2024, but remain more than twice as high as pre-2022 levels - 🏠 For startups valued between $25-50M, in-state hiring increased from 37% in 2022 to 49% in 2024 What's fascinating is the AI-driven bifurcation of the tech workforce: While 22,042 tech employees have been laid off across numerous companies in early 2025, many organizations are simultaneously accelerating hiring in AI-specific roles. Meta, for example, is cutting about 5% of staff while noticeably ramping up machine learning engineer hiring. Similarly, Salesforce eliminated about 1,000 roles while actively recruiting for AI-focused positions. This isn't just cost-cutting – it's a strategic reallocation driven by AI's impact on productivity: - 🧠 Companies are eliminating roles made redundant by AI tools while adding positions for AI specialists and data engineers - 💼 Customer-facing functions like sales continue to grow, suggesting these human-centered roles remain harder to automate - 📱 Roles in artificial intelligence and cybersecurity show demand outpacing supply despite the broader downsizing trend For tech executives, the message is clear: AI adoption is creating "continuous cycles of strategic workforce realignment" as organizations determine which functions benefit most from human talent versus automation.

Workforce Planning (WP). Here's my cheat sheet for using aspects of scenario planning for WP. Many WP efforts still operate as static, once-a-year exercises often built around a single business scenario. But what if that scenario doesn't happen? My cheat sheet has examples to help you think through: 👉 BUSINESS CONTEXT 1/ Business Scenarios ↳ What plausible business scenarios might we face over the next 24 months? 2/ Scenario Assumptions ↳ What evidence, assumptions, data, or trends suggest these scenarios are likely and worth planning for? 3/ Scenario Triggers ↳ What leading indicators would suggest a scenario is more likely to occur? 4/ Scenario Business Impact ↳ How would each scenario affect business goals (e.g., growth, sales)? 5/ Base Scenario (Most Likely) ↳ Which scenario do we believe is most likely to happen? What are we basing this on? 👉 TALENT IMPLICATIONS 6/ Plan for Base Scenario ↳ For our base business scenario (what we expect), what are the key aspects of the workforce plan? 7/ Directional Plan for Alternate Scenarios ↳ For each alternate scenario, what directional adjustments would be required in our base plan? 8/ Common Talent Themes ↳ Are there shared or common talent-related needs or risks that appear across multiple scenarios? 9/ Common Talent Actions ↳ What talent actions will be required across all of our possible scenarios? (Helps prioritize shared actions.) 👉 EXECUTION FACTORS 10/ Decision Triggers ↳ Based on the scenario triggers, what thresholds would indicate we should begin shifting from the base plan to an alternate one? (Helps get a head start). 11/ Risk Mitigation ↳ What talent-related risks are introduced by each scenario, and how can we mitigate them proactively? 12/ Communications Needs ↳ What communications guidance would different stakeholders need under each scenario? 13/ Key Stakeholders ↳ Who needs to be involved in scenario-based workforce planning and execution? How do we align? 👉 A few more thoughts: ↳ This isn’t about creating multiple workforce plans ↳ It’s about planning for the base scenario while... ↳ gaining directional insights into how plans might flex ↳ This helps us respond effectively if scenarios shift ↳ Even high-level insights are better than none at all ↳ Whether you use these questions or not, start today ↳ Doing so will prepare you for what the future brings ❓Did anything here resonate with you? What would you add or change? Let me know. ♻️ Repost to help others strengthen workforce planning 🔔 Follow Brian Heger for daily HR insights #hr #humanresources #workforceplanning

Recruiters! Want a free headcount and role approval planning sheet? Course you do! 👇 I’ve led 3 major workforce planning projects over the last 7 years. Every single one of them was a pain in the bum. But they were also some of the highest-leverage work I’ve ever done. More than sourcing strategies or shiny new ATS features. Workforce planning is where recruiters can save the business millions. So, here are three tips to help you step into the no man’s land of headcount planning plus a free headcount approval tracker with easy to follow workflows and a video walkthrough you can clone and use today. [TL;DR - link in comments] 1️⃣ Three stakeholder groups. Leadership: Creates the need. Their job is to decide if the problem is human-shaped, process-shaped, or tool-shaped. If it’s human-shaped, it becomes headcount. Finance: Governs the budget. Headcount = a bucket of money committed to the salary of the new employee. Talent Acquisition: Validates the request and builds the plan to execute it. Most recruiters only get pulled in at the end. You need to be involved from the start before headcount locks in so you can challenge anything that's not feasible. 2️⃣ Get aligned on what “headcount” means. Everyone uses the word, but no one means the same thing: Leadership: “We need to backfill Steve.” Finance: “This is a €120K budget line for Q3.” TA: “This is a role on our open req list.” If in doubt, go with finance’s definition. Headcount is a financial object with a forecast cost range reconciling to an actual salary. That number matters. Build a way to reconcile forecast vs. actual salary and get it to finance fast. You will be their hero. I've worked with organisations that only reconcile forecast vs actual at year end and its like a fun little surprise if they have overspent by a few million dollars. That one action can: ✅ Unlock leftover budget ✅ Forewarn overspend ✅ Help close out ghost roles 3️⃣ You’re the only one incentivised to challenge bad headcount. If you’re in TA, you are the last line of defence against duplicated roles from different silos, overlapping scopes and just general vibe driven requests. A few of years ago, I trimmed a hiring plan from 135 to 95 roles. Just by asking: “How critical is this?” “What problem does this role solve?” “Could someone internally do this?” That saved €2.3M in yearly budget and unlocked 9 internal promotions. And if you’re managing this at scale, definitely check out TeamOhana. Superb tool. Workforce planning might not be sexy but it is an enormous opportunity for TA to step into a strategic role How about you? How does headcount planning run in your business? Tell me in the comments! Hi 👋 I’m Luke. I help recruiters do more with less, using data, systems, and strategic thinking. Follow along or join the free weekly Data Driven Recruiter Newsletter in my bio.

Every tech leader is about to face a fork in the road. The National Academies' 2025 AI & Future of Work report makes this clear: “Society has a choice in whether and where AI is used to augment human expertise versus substitute for it.” Many C-suites are framing AI as a cost-reduction play. Fewer heads. Lower overhead. But the research shows something different: Companies seeing real productivity gains from AI (contact centers ↑, software development ↑, knowledge work quality ↑) are the ones using it to multiply their teams' capabilities, not just shrink them. Here is a quick example: When you use AI to eliminate a mid-level analyst role, you save $80K/year. When you use AI to enable that analyst to do director-level work, you create $200K+ of value without the 18-month search for senior talent. The report is explicit: AI's impact on your business “will depend on whether and how capabilities are implemented based on collective choices.” The companies that win over the next 3 years will be the ones that understand substitution is a one-time efficiency gain, while augmentation is a compounding capability advantage. The question comes down to whether you're building a workforce strategy that treats AI as a talent multiplier or a talent eliminator. Because your best people are watching which one you choose. #TechLeadership #AIStrategy #TalentStrategy #FutureOfWork

Your Workforce Plan is a Balance Sheet Risk Workforce planning isn’t just an HR function anymore—it’s a financial and strategic imperative. Labor shortages, wage inflation, and geopolitical instability have turned talent management into a direct balance sheet risk. Leaders who fail to see this will find themselves outpaced by those who do. First, talent pipelines need to be managed like cash flow forecasts. Just as CFOs project revenue and expenses, leaders must anticipate skill shortages, hiring slowdowns, and turnover risks. A just-in-time hiring strategy is no longer viable—proactive workforce planning is now a competitive necessity. Second, wage inflation is creating hidden financial liabilities. Market-driven salary spikes, pay transparency laws, and employee retention pressures are pushing labor costs up. Smart leaders are reassessing compensation strategies, exploring fractional talent models, and redesigning job structures to mitigate cost escalations. Third, geopolitical risks are reshaping workforce strategy. Talent pools are shifting due to global conflicts, visa restrictions, and economic downturns. Companies that diversify their talent sources—leveraging remote work, nearshoring, and global hiring hubs—will be more resilient than those tethered to a single market. Most critically, workforce agility is now a hedge against volatility. The ability to scale up, redeploy talent, and reskill employees quickly is no longer a luxury—it’s a survival strategy. Leaders who treat workforce planning like an extension of financial risk management will build organizations that thrive in uncertainty. Those who don’t will struggle to keep pace. Learn more at https://buff.ly/4gZHQJf