No one likes second-guessing, but for HR leaders, software-buying regret can cost the organization more than money. However, a new report from Accenture and the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania suggests HR leaders have the influence and experience to prevent the sense that a purchase went wrong.
Tech as a growth lever
Many CEOs are in go-mode around tech and AI, and they increasingly expect HR to lean on tools that solve growth, talent and security problems. Technology and software rank as the second-highest investment priority for 2026, as previously reported by HR Executive, while technology and AI investments rank third. “Switching business software is often framed as a growth move for US SMBs in 2026,” according to a fresh report from research firm Expert Market.
Data from that report shows that nearly three-quarters of U.S. SMBs are re-evaluating their current tech investments. Unfortunately, tech buys often may introduce an element of regret due if there is a poor organizational fit, according to Expert Market.
Meanwhile, the researchers from Accenture and Wharton found that “adding AI to existing processes will not generate meaningful value” unless leaders reshape how work is performed across humans and agents. These points both suggest that HR and business leaders need to link tech purchases to true organizational needs, not just AI hopes.
What drives performance?
This can be true for organizations of any size, but small and medium businesses may have fewer resources to hit organizational redesign head-on. And who isn’t concerned about the budget? Expert Market’s Finance Pulse survey of 300 US SMB decision-makers found that “82% of those who significantly regret switching enterprise software also say tech costs are eating into business growth.”
The Wharton-Accenture Skills Index reveals that many organizations continue to evaluate the workforce through a roles lens rather than a skills lens. The researchers suggest that “workforce strategy must move beyond generic capability frameworks toward role- and industry-specific skill economics.” This mindset means that HR teams will need to identify which skills drive performance and align pay and career to development (including tech training) to support this structure.
However, holes in this strategy have a waterfall effect. Leaders can’t accurately assess whether a new system will support the capabilities that actually drive outcomes in their specific context without having that skills architecture first.
A lack of alignment may slow the most powerful growth indicators. Accenture found that roughly one-third of productivity gains show up as simple cost avoidance. “Without intentional redeployment, that avoided cost does not become growth,” wrote the researchers.
Read more: New research reveals the execution gap in skills-based hiring
HR tech as a competitive advantage
Though this may sound discouraging, neither research report argues against moving to new software platforms. In reality, there are signs that making the right tech implementations is a growth driver, whatever that looks like for the specific needs of each business.
“Intelligence is no longer scarce; it is scalable,” according to Accenture and Wharton. “The next source of competitive advantage will be how effectively organizations combine human judgment with agent-enabled execution, and how deliberately they redeploy their newfound capacity.”
Both reports offer similar advice for HR leaders:
- Map workforce capabilities at the task and skill level before evaluating vendors.
- Require implementation planning to address workforce readiness.
- Build the redeployment plan before signing, not after go-live.
Ultimately, HR leaders won’t fare well claiming ignorance if enterprise workforce software, AI-powered or otherwise, fails. “Intelligence may be scalable,” according to Accenture and Wharton, “but accountability is not.”
Credit: Source link
