People Practices in 2026
Insights from FirstMark's Chief People Officer Guild on how top technology companies are approaching people strategy in 2026
About this survey
The FirstMark People Practices Survey provides a clear picture into what these executives are thinking about and how they are operating when it comes to areas like talent, process, metrics, tools, and platform shifts.
This edition was open only to members of FirstMark’s Chief People Officer Guild; an invite-only community of executives from the FirstMark portfolio and the broader unicorn ecosystem.
We hope that you find the results of this survey helpful and invite you to email us at community@firstmark.com with any requests for specific questions or data points you would like added to future surveys. Your feedback will be invaluable as we aim to make this resource more impactful every year.
Want to participate and get early access?
PEOPLE
SURVEY
SURVEY
20
26
HR Leaders from the world's leading companies participated, including:
Table of Contents
HR's Expanding MandateTool Growth Outpacing People CapacityThe Recruiting Treadmill and Its Hidden CostWork Models Are StabilizingHybrid Workplace NormsAI Is Here, but Operationalization LagsThe Real AI BottlenecksAI Enablement Lacks Clear OwnershipThe insights that follow are not a summary of every data point in this report. They reflect the most meaningful shifts we see across product, engineering, and technology leadership today. By comparing this year’s responses with last year’s, clear patterns emerge in how teams are building products, buying tools, deploying AI, and structuring their organizations.
Rather than cataloging tools or preferences, each insight pulls together multiple signals into a single takeaway. The charts that accompany them are intentionally focused, highlighting what has changed and why it matters. Taken together, these insights show how leading teams are adapting to growing system complexity, faster AI adoption, and changing expectations around productivity, tooling, and work models.
People Teams Are Being Asked to Transform While Staying Flat.
Navigating AI tops the challenges list, followed by burnout, engagement, the economy, and change, with budget constraints and scope creep followed close behind.
The signal is clear: transformation is layered on top of ongoing operational pressure. People leaders are not being asked to swap priorities; they're being asked to add new ones.
AI change management, workforce resilience, performance and cost discipline are now simultaneous mandates. The tension is not cyclical. It's a permanent broadening of mandate without proportional expansion of resources.
The signal is clear: transformation is layered on top of ongoing operational pressure. People leaders are not being asked to swap priorities; they're being asked to add new ones.
AI change management, workforce resilience, performance and cost discipline are now simultaneous mandates. The tension is not cyclical. It's a permanent broadening of mandate without proportional expansion of resources.
Key Takeaway: The People function’s mandate is expanding faster than its capacity.
What people leaders see as their biggest challenge right now
Navigating AI
Burnout
Employee Engagement
The Economy
Change
Budget Constraints
Being expected to do it all!
Tool Growth Is Expected, Even as Complexity Is Already High.
Most People teams expect their tool stack to grow next year and very few anticipate cutting tools. Every new system adds integration work, training demands, governance overhead, and workflow complexity. This isn't consolidation; it's expansion.
In lean teams, additional tooling can increase coordination load faster than it increases output. The surface narrative is modernization. The operational reality is rising complexity.
In lean teams, additional tooling can increase coordination load faster than it increases output. The surface narrative is modernization. The operational reality is rising complexity.
Key Takeaway: HR tech stacks are expanding by default, not consolidating by design.
Most People teams expect their tool stack to grow next year...
Less tools
The same amount
More tools
Recruiting Still Commands a Large Share of Capacity.
A significant portion of People organizations report that 30% to 60% of their bandwidth goes to recruiting and the distribution skews toward the higher end.
When that much capacity is tied to hiring, everything else—manager manager enablement, performance systems, and retention design—competes for what's left.
Recruiting isn't a marginal activity. It's a dominant one.
When that much capacity is tied to hiring, everything else—manager manager enablement, performance systems, and retention design—competes for what's left.
Recruiting isn't a marginal activity. It's a dominant one.
Key Takeaway: For many People teams, recruiting remains the center of gravity.
What percentage of your People org focuses on recruiting?
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%+
Productivity Confidence Is Strongest in More Structured Work Models.
Organizations with more employees in-office or hybrid report higher productivity confidence. Fully remote environments show more mixed results, with fewer leaders selecting the highest ratings.
The pattern is consistent: defined presence expectations reinforce clarity around execution and coordination. More structure, more perceived stability.
The pattern is consistent: defined presence expectations reinforce clarity around execution and coordination. More structure, more perceived stability.
Key Takeaway: Confidence in productivity rises as work models become more structured and in-person anchored.
What % of your employees were designated in-office or hybrid in 2025?
0% (Fully Remote)
< 25%
26-50%
51-75%
76-100% (Mostly In-Office)
How confident are you that your company's current approach (in-office, hybrid, remote, etc.) maintains strong productivity? (5 = Very confident)5
4
3
2
1
Hybrid Has Converged Around a Three-Day In-Office Standard.
Three days a week has emerged as the clear in-office standard among hybrid organizations.
This convergence points to a shared view that consistent in-person overlap supports collaboration, onboarding, and decision-making speed; with enough flexibility to remain competitive for talent.
This convergence points to a shared view that consistent in-person overlap supports collaboration, onboarding, and decision-making speed; with enough flexibility to remain competitive for talent.
Key Takeaway: Hybrid is consolidating around three in-office days as the operational norm.
For companies with a hybrid or in-office model, what is your minimum number of days/week in the office? (1-5 days)
1
2
3
4
5
AI Usage Is Predominantly Experimental.
Most teams are experimenting with a few AI tools or pilots. A smaller group is using AI across multiple HR workflows and a meaningful minority is still in early exploration.
AI is clearly present in the function, but full operational integration is not yet the norm. The distribution shows movement, not maturity.
AI is clearly present in the function, but full operational integration is not yet the norm. The distribution shows movement, not maturity.
Key Takeaway: AI in HR is widespread, but not yet operationalized.
How are you currently using AI in HR or People functions?
Actively using AI across multiple HR workflows
Experimenting with a few AI tools or pilots
In early exploration or planning stages
Have not yet explored AI tools for HR
The Primary Barriers to AI Are Human, Not Technical.
The biggest challenge to AI adoption clusters around time, fear, resources, and integration; not tool selection. Privacy and ethics are cited, but less frequently.
The friction is behavioral and organizational, not technological. Adoption stalls on readiness, confidence, and bandwidth.
The data points to change management, not tool scarcity.
The friction is behavioral and organizational, not technological. Adoption stalls on readiness, confidence, and bandwidth.
The data points to change management, not tool scarcity.
Key Takeaway: AI adoption friction is driven more by readiness than by tooling gaps.
What's your biggest challenge with AI adoption in People or HR?
Finding the right tools
Time
Fear
Other
Resources
Lack of integration
Privacy & security
Ethics
AI Enablement Lacks Clear Ownership in Most Organizations.
Most organizations have no formal AI enablement program—or only informal efforts—and a large share report no dedicated person or team responsible for it.
This reinforces the experimental posture seen earlier. AI may be available, but it is not consistently owned, governed, or institutionalized.
Without defined ownership, adoption stays uneven.
This reinforces the experimental posture seen earlier. AI may be available, but it is not consistently owned, governed, or institutionalized.
Without defined ownership, adoption stays uneven.
Key Takeaway: In most organizations, AI enablement is not yet formally “owned.”
Do you have an internal AI enablement or education program for employees?
No
Planning
Yes, but informal
Yes
Is there a person or team dedicated to AI enablement at your org?No
Unsure
Yes
Enter your email for instant access to the full report.
View interactive charts, filter data by organization size, financing round, and revenue scale, and more...
Thank you! Please check your email for access to the full report.
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.