USA 
United Kingdom
US HR leaders are taking on greater responsibility for pay, promotions, and cost management, but many say fragmented systems and limited data are constraining fair and effective decision-making, according to new research from HiBob.
The company, which produces the Bob people management platform, released its HiBob HR & Finance Report examining how HR leaders balance employee expectations with financial discipline.
“HR is facing a harsher reality where decisions about pay, promotions, and employee development are still people decisions, but are also weighted more heavily as a business decision, too,” said Ronni Zehavi, co-founder and CEO of HiBob. “This study shows that without clear data and aligned priorities, leaders struggle to be fair while meeting organizational goals. Understanding these challenges is the first step toward making better, more informed decisions.”
Fairness and pay under pressure
More than two-thirds of respondents, 68%, said they cannot make truly fair pay decisions without a unified view of people and financial data. Some 25% reported difficulty assigning performance ratings that influence pay in a fair way, while 31% cited conflicts between people goals and financial goals as a top obstacle.
Paid development opportunities present another challenge. Some 25% said it is difficult to fairly determine who should participate in training courses and conferences.
The findings point to a broader shift in expectations. HR leaders are increasingly asked to safeguard engagement and equity while also supporting cost control and growth targets. That dual mandate is playing out in compensation and performance processes that rely on information drawn from multiple systems.
Data access slows decision-making
The report shows that 82% of HR leaders believe timely, unified HR and finance data would enable more cost-effective people decisions. Yet 70% said role-based permissions or privacy rules restrict access to the data they need.
Nearly half, 45%, spend three to four hours assembling information such as one-on-one notes and sales figures from different systems before completing a performance review and making promotion decisions.
When accessing the right people or finance data becomes too time-consuming, about 66% said they opt for an educated guess rather than risk missing a deadline.
The research also highlights appetite for clearer guardrails and technology support. Some 32% said defined finance guardrails would enable better decisions. Meanwhile, 31% pointed to AI tools that summarize data and recommend options as a way to improve people decision-making.
HR leaders said they would most leverage AI recommendations during performance reviews, cited by 36% of respondents. Another 34% said AI would be most useful for identifying and managing people risks, including high-performer attrition and skills gaps. Some 31% said AI recommendations would help identify and manage financial risks such as deadlines or quotas.
“Unifying people and financial data, powered by AI, allows HR to act as a true strategic partner, helping organizations make faster, more defensible decisions with clearer business impact,” Zehavi added.
For chief people officers and CHROs, the findings illustrate how accountability for workforce investment is rising, even as access to consistent, real-time data remains uneven.
