#72 JooBee's newsletter

TL;DR

🤖 Your founder has Claude. Here’s why they still need strategic HR 

👀 How I helped a founder when Claude couldn’t help her  

🎧 Listen to the newsletter here

This newsletter edition is brought to you by Rippling 💛

Your founder has Claude. Here’s why they still need strategic HR 

Whether I was a CPeO, or now working externally as an advisor, I've always been wary of founders who ask for help and expect a neat 7-step "how to do the thing" answer. More often than not, they already have an answer or solution in mind. Pre-AI, it would be from a book they read, or a founder friend who told them what worked. Now, it's usually Claude (or one of their favourite AI buddies 😅). 

What I'd then spend the next 3 weeks doing is convincing them that my solution is better than the solution they'd already picked for themselves, deep down. What a waste of time 🤷🏻‍♀️.

So when this founder asked me, point-blank: "I can get the answer to my questions from Claude. Why do I need you as an advisor?" — I thought, “Ah… a founder I want to work with!”

She was self-aware and didn't beat around the bush about already having answers, but was genuinely asking whether I could add anything to them. 

Strategic HR value doesn't come from the ‘solutions’ you propose

She wasn't wrong. Claude can give her answers and endless solutions. And if, as HR leaders, we still think our core value is coming up with solutions to founders' problems, then we'll quickly be replaced by AI.

So I suggested she put the problem she’s grappling with on the table, and we would stress-test how I could actually help her solve it. In our 60-minute conversation, it became a push-and-pull process to help her get clearer about the decision in front of her. During the conversation, I told her:

And that is exactly where I think our biggest value as HR leaders sits:

1. We work with the emotion behind the decision 

AI can give your founder solutions to problems faster than you can say "I'll start Monday." But it can't read the human feeling behind the decision they need to make, especially when the person isn't even aware of it themselves. Every decision carries weight — risk appetite, relationships, ego, fear of getting it wrong, ambition for what could work. If we don't understand what's actually holding the decision back, the best solution in the world won't land. 

2. We know whether it’s a challenge moment or an assure moment

When a founder is navigating the emotion behind a tough decision, the right steer, whether to assure or to challenge, comes from reading what they need in that moment. Sometimes they need to feel heard before they can hear a way forward. Other times, it's holding up a mirror when they're making excuses, delaying or circling on a decision. That's where our judgment call comes in when advising founders. 

3. We keep them focused when they stray from the outcome they want

After they make a decision, AI can send a reminder. But it can't hold founders accountable when the follow-through gets uncomfortable and takes real emotional resilience. That's where they need someone who cares about their success enough to notice when they're relapsing into comfort and steer them back. 

When AI is enough, and when founders need us

When motivation is high, the barrier to discomfort is low, and the problem is straightforward, founders can always rely on AI. Let them🙃. 

For me, it is similar to exercising. Some people are disciplined, highly motivated to be healthy, and love the feeling of working out. All they need is the best plan Claude can give them, and off they go. 

I am not one of those people😅. I'll avoid the gym with Olympic-level creativity. Claude could give me a hundred workout ideas, and my lazy a** still wouldn't get to the gym. So I got a PT. 

Founders are no different. Some problems just need a solution. But the ones asking for "7 steps," circling the same decision for the fifth week running? They need someone who reads the moment, knows when to push and when to hold, and stays in the room until the decision actually moves forward.

If we're positioning ourselves as the person with the best answers, we'll keep competing with AI… and losing. If we position ourselves as the person who creates a breakthrough, we become irreplaceable.

How I helped a founder when Claude couldn’t help her   

One of the biggest advantages we still have over AI is knowing when to challenge a founder and when to reassure them. And when it comes to challenge, if you've followed my content for a while, you probably know I can be pretty direct. 

Now, before I continue, let me say: this isn't the only way to challenge founders. I know plenty of brilliant advisors who get incredible results with a much gentler touch.

Challenging directly is simply the approach that works for me, and I want to share it as another option you can add to your influencing toolkit. 

We've been taught to soften the blow, and it comes with a cost

Early in our careers, many of us are taught how to "land a point" without bruising someone's ego. We learn all the little techniques for making disagreement feel more palatable.

We say: "Perhaps it might be helpful to consider..."
When we really mean: "This is the decision you're avoiding."

We say: "One thing to reflect on is..."
When we really mean: "You're circling because you don't like the trade-off."

We say: "There may be an opportunity to create more clarity..."
When we really mean: "Your team is confused because you haven't made the call."

Founders at build-to-scale are making decisions with limited time, emotional attachment, commercial pressure and teams looking for direction… all at once🤯. In that environment, softening becomes noise. Not kindness. Noise. They don't need us to wrap the truth in 6 layers of corporate bubble wrap, they need us to bring clarity.

Being direct reduces noise and respects founders' limited time 

The founder from Part 1 was circling. She needed to come to a decision. In our 60-minute conversation, I listened, asked plenty of "why" questions and told her upfront I was going to be direct.

So when I said the things most communication coaches would probably tell me never to say: 

• "What I'm hearing is a lot of excuses."

• "You've repeated this five times. I'm going to stop you there."

• "If that's what you're looking to do, I'm not the right person for you."

She didn’t shut down. Instead, she leaned in. 

When we finished, she said she appreciated it. Because she knew she'd been beating around the bush herself, and that hearing it said plainly helped her move forward.

Direct challenge is a pattern interrupt that holds clarity for the founder

Of course, I pulled out snippets of the conversation for dramatic effect🤪. But in all seriousness, here’s what the complete exchange sounded like: 

"What I'm hearing is a lot of excuses. Why do you think it feels hard for you to make this decision?"

"You've repeated this five times. I'm going to stop you there. Why do you think you haven't been able to come to a decision?"

"If that's what you're looking to do, I'm not the right person for you. Here's what I believe in as an HR leader. If that belief matters to you, then I can help. If it doesn't, another HR leader who shares your belief might be a better fit."

The direct statement holds up a mirror. It stops the circling and creates a pause, long enough for the founder to see exactly what is happening. The question that follows is what brings the founder back to understanding the emotion they may not realise is holding them back. And my role is to hold them there, without letting them stray, rationalise or find another excuse not to move forward.

To be this direct, you need safety and trust first 

If you want to try this approach, there are 3 things I always do before I challenge a founder:

1. I make my intent clear, so they know what to expect.

2. I explain why I'm choosing to be direct, so they understand my approach.

3. I ask permission to go there, so they have a choice in how we have the conversation.

For example, I might say: "I'm going to challenge you quite directly today because I think clarity will help you more than reassurance. Is that okay?"

Most importantly, I make it obvious, through both my words and my actions, that I'm in this with them, not at them. That's what allows those direct statements to land safely. 

That's the difference between advising and answering

Claude can give founders plenty of useful answers and solutions😅. But when a founder has been circling the same decision for 5 weeks, the problem usually isn’t a lack of information. It is often the trade-off they do not want to face. That is where we add value. We help them face what is really holding them back from making the decision, stay with the discomfort, and move towards a decision they are ready to make.

How you choose to challenge is your personal style. But if you’ve been thinking about trying direct challenge, this might be one approach worth experimenting with.

Step up from HR Leader to Business Leader

Ready to influence strategically, drive business impact and make HR indispensable?
Here are 3 ways I can help: