In this episode of the HR Digitalization Podcast, Anna Carlsson and Emira Blomberg are joined by Petra Schedin Stergel, Secretary General of the Swedish HR Association, who shares her perspectives on what it means to stay relevant as an HR professional today – and why it is more important than ever to step forward as a strategic partner.
The conversation moves between change leadership, digitalization, AI, and HR’s future position within organizations. We discuss how HR can build trust in times of uncertainty, why courage and openness are essential for driving development, and how Human Intelligence (HI) becomes a necessary counterbalance and complement to AI.
A recurring theme is the importance of daring to test, share experiences, and create joint learning platforms. Petra also highlights current issues such as talent supply, new legal requirements, and the need to see HR as a driver of organizational development rather than just a support function.
The episode offers both strategic insights and concrete advice for HR professionals who want to take an active role in a time of transformation.
Tune in to be inspired to dare more, challenge established patterns, and find strength in combining human competence with new technological opportunities.
Note: This episode is in Swedish. A translated transcript is available below.
transcript:
Anna Carlsson: In this episode, Emira and I are joined by Petra Schedin Stergel, Secretary General of the Swedish HR Association. I’ve made it a habit to invite the HR Association to the podcast, since they have a unique insight into what’s happening in the industry – through their members and contacts across everything from universities to companies and other stakeholders.
We talk about HR’s role in a time of rapid and far-reaching change – where technology, societal development, and new expectations place demands on both leadership and ways of working. And about why it’s more important than ever for HR to step forward as a strategic partner. Petra shares her perspectives, and we discuss what it means to stay relevant, how to build trust during times of change – and why it’s not enough to wait for someone else to lead the way.
The conversation also ties into the training program HR Loves Tech & AI, which I run together with the HR Association, where we give HR the tools to take active steps in digitalization. The next training session starts on September 23. Feel free to recommend it to a colleague or friend who could benefit from this course. You’ll find details on both my and the HR Association’s websites.
Anna Carlsson: Welcome to the HR Digitalization Podcast, Petra.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Thank you so much! I’m very happy to be here.
Anna Carlsson: And of course, Emira is here today. You’re not in every episode exactly, but almost.
Emira Blomberg: Today I’m here.
Anna Carlsson: Yes, today you’re here.
Emira Blomberg: Yes.
Anna Carlsson: Perfect. I thought I’d start with a little… well, I always record the intro afterwards. But now that we’re sitting here, I keep thinking about the fact that I’ve had your predecessors here before, two different ones actually. Since we’ve collaborated – or rather, I’ve collaborated with you in the HR Association for quite a while now. And now we’re running training sessions together. So this is really a small part of that training. But I find it incredibly interesting every time I get to meet someone in your role, because of the ear you keep to the ground, both you and the association as a whole. That, I think, is really exciting. What do you see and hear? You get to represent that collective voice.
Petra Schedin Stergel: I’ll do my very best.
Anna Carlsson: But who are you, Petra?
Petra Schedin Stergel: I’m a 56-year-old woman who has spent my entire career in HR. I’ve been an HR Manager, HR Director, CHRO – all sorts of different titles. So, you could call me an HR professional. I’ve been part of management teams for 25 years in various types of organizations. That has shaped me a lot, including my view on HR and what I think is important. Yes, that’s me.
Anna Carlsson: Do you have a degree in Human Resource Management?
Petra Schedin Stergel: Yes, absolutely!
Anna Carlsson: A “Personalvetare.”
Petra Schedin Stergel: I studied at Uppsala University – Human Resources and Organization. I think that’s what the program was called. I graduated in 1995, so it’s been quite a while. But of course, I’m here today because, as you pointed out, I’m the Secretary General of the Swedish HR Association.
Anna Carlsson: And how long have you been in that role now?
Petra Schedin Stergel: I’ve been in it for about a year and eight months or so. So soon it’ll be two years.
Anna Carlsson: Wow, already that long? We’re sitting here just before the summer holidays, but listeners will hear this on September 1st, I said. Yes, that’s right – you have to do some things in advance. But you really have a solid background, which means you can really understand your members’ various…
Petra Schedin Stergel: …circumstances, exactly. I certainly hope so. I’ve worked in many different industries. I have a long background in finance, specifically auditing, where I spent over 16 years. That’s obviously a big part of who I am, how I see the world, and how I think about issues like employee development in that type of organization. But I’ve also worked in construction, in tech, and even a stint in the museum sector. I’ve also worked in the public sector, so I have a pretty solid understanding of the conditions you can face in different environments.
But I should also say that I think HR is, by nature, quite generic. And that’s an advantage for our profession – that we can move between industries and still add value quite quickly, regardless of whether you’re producing cars, audit reports, education, or whatever the organization does.
Emira Blomberg: How did it come about that you took on the challenge of becoming Secretary General?
Petra Schedin Stergel: I think it has to do with exactly what I just described – that I have this broad background from many industries, always within HR but across very different contexts, so to speak. And I’m also convinced that it’s because I have a profile where I want to see a certain kind of development for HR. I think it’s interesting to work with HR’s platform in order to enable the changes and goals we set in different organizations. It’s always been important to me to strengthen HR’s platform and positioning so that we can really succeed in our mission – and I think that’s something people noticed.
Also, I happen to be rather fearless, and that’s necessary when you’re trying to move something forward. And that’s probably why I’m here, I would say.
Anna Carlsson: Was there anything that surprised you when you started? Something you thought, “Wow, I didn’t expect that”?
Petra Schedin Stergel: We have about 4,000 members today, spread all over Sweden. I’ve always been a member myself. I wasn’t particularly engaged because I had other things going on, but I still thought it was important to be part of the association. What surprised me a bit was that so many within HR, or people working with people-related issues – as I prefer to say these days – actually don’t know about the association. That surprised me, because the association is over 103 years old, so you’d think you’d come across it at some point during your education or at some point in your HR career.
So, that’s a challenge for us – to reach more people and explain what we do. That was a bit unexpected, honestly.
Emira Blomberg: Well, then it’s perfect that you’re here now.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Exactly!
Emira Blomberg: Because I also think it’s not entirely clear what the HR Association actually is.
Petra Schedin Stergel: No, exactly – that’s one of the challenges. Those of us who held my role earlier probably assumed it was obvious what we do, what we contribute, and that it should naturally be valuable for HR professionals. But maybe it’s not that obvious. So now we’re trying to approach it differently.
I also think we need to broaden our perspective as an association – to open up rather than close in. I want to see other professionals or roles join the association. For example, managers who spend most of their days working with people issues. Or specialists like payroll experts, labor law lawyers, or leadership developers.
Emira Blomberg: Maybe even us on the product side, who deliver solutions to HR?
Petra Schedin Stergel: From my perspective, there’s absolutely nothing stopping that. As long as you have an interest in people-related issues and see that it affects your work, then the HR Association is a great place to deepen your competence and understanding in this area. And of course, you can specialize in different ways, just like many of us have within what we traditionally call HR – for instance, by studying HR at university. That’s how I see it.
Anna Carlsson: And the association itself – now that I’ve been involved for some time and gotten to know you fairly well, I really see it’s about walking together to be able to make an impact. That’s what an association can do. Without a network and collaboration, it’s difficult to have influence. Who else should you turn to if you want to get clear answers about how things really work in Sweden, or what’s possible, and about all the different questions where we both need answers and need to have influence?
Petra Schedin Stergel: Exactly, that’s just how it is. From my background I know that often, as an HR professional or someone responsible for HR issues, you can feel very alone. Especially in smaller organizations, you might be the only one working with this responsibility. Or maybe you just have a half-time payroll administrator as a colleague. Or maybe you’re just a small group of HR specialists. Then it’s nice to know there’s someone you can lean on, listen to, and take guidance from: “What are they saying? What direction are they pointing in?” That way you’re more prepared when specific challenges come up – whether it’s changes in legislation or in expectations about what HR should deliver.
And that’s the friend we want to be – that wall you can lean against when things feel a bit lonely, or when you want to look into the future.
Anna Carlsson: Yes, but if you look at HR… maybe we shouldn’t even call it that. What should we call it? I mean, the association is called the HR Association, so let’s start there. But a while back I stuck my neck out and said maybe we should have both a Chief People Officer and a Chief HR Officer. That way you’d separate the regulatory, structural, and practical things you need to master from the people-oriented, more outward-looking strategic role. Not everyone can carry both in the same body.
Petra Schedin Stergel: No, absolutely not. That’s a huge challenge. And on top of that, you have the ambitions and personal preferences about how you want to be seen. It can feel “cooler” to be a People Officer than an HR Manager.
Anna Carlsson: Right?
Petra Schedin Stergel: And in some environments that matters, in others not at all. But I think it’s really about understanding that HR means a lot of different things. There are many different contexts, and there isn’t just one way to define it. So I think we need to live with that, and make it a natural part of who we are – that we have different ways to describe both roles and focus areas.
For me, HR is my educational background. It’s the department I might belong to in an organization, the concrete responsibilities we have there. Whereas “People” is the arena we work in – the issues we deal with where we’re specialists, but where others are also involved. Like I mentioned before – all managers, for example.
And why is it so important to make that distinction? For me, it’s because managers are often the ones who actually execute what we, in HR, ensure is in place in the organization. And I want to move away from this idea that “HR has said,” or “HR thinks,” or “HR has decided.” That’s not what it’s about. The people domain is a strategically critical area – it’s written into business strategies. What HR then does is specialize in translating that into plans and activities within the area.
But it’s about opening up for other perspectives and doing it together, instead of closing ranks and looking only inward, stuck in a silo. That’s what’s important to me. But honestly, you could call it “Pelle” if you want. It doesn’t matter – HR or People.
Anna Carlsson: That makes me think of IT departments. They used to just be “the IT department.” And suddenly there’s a Chief Digitalization Officer, because digitalization became something that runs through everything. And that’s exactly what people-related issues are now as well. These are two very strong areas that need to have significant influence in organizations.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Yes, absolutely. And I understand that titles can be useful when you’re positioning yourself within an organization. And that you can build on that by calling something a certain name.
I did it myself when I was at PwC about a hundred years ago, when I started as HR Director. I changed the name from “Human Resources” to “Human Capital.” This was back in 2006, so quite a while ago. But it was really important in that organization to clarify the difference between Human Resources and Human Capital.
Auditors understood that “resources” are consumed, but “capital” is managed. Wow, did they have to think about that! And it gave me a huge platform to talk about what we actually contributed to the organization. But in that case, it was more about positioning than about content.
Emira Blomberg: It’s the same thing with Talent Acquisition.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Of course.
Emira Blomberg: It also got a new title, but it hasn’t really had the breakthrough we might have hoped for – in terms of understanding how extremely business-critical recruitment really is. “Recruitment” just doesn’t sound as…
Anna Carlsson: …catchy.
Emira Blomberg: Exactly. And not as business-oriented, somehow.
Petra Schedin Stergel: No, absolutely. But I think the challenges for Talent Acquisition are a little different from those for HR, because it’s so directly affected by the business cycle. When times get tougher for companies, they cut back on Talent Acquisition, because they don’t see the same need anymore. And just when you feel like you’ve got everything working smoothly, with flow and processes in place – suddenly it’s scaled down again. And then, not suddenly but eventually, it ramps back up. That cycle really challenges that part of HR.
Anna Carlsson: Because you can’t stop there. The strategic side ends up in a constant start-stop situation, which is tough.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Exactly. It makes long-term planning really difficult, because external triggers keep shifting the conditions. Sure, that’s true in many areas – but especially here.
Anna Carlsson: I had a thought earlier that I wanted to bring up – about why the HR Association exists, and also about the training program we run together on digitalization and AI (and we also cover data, even if it’s not in the title).
What I’ve noticed is that within, well, let’s call it the “people profession,” there isn’t much sharing. And maybe that also explains why the association isn’t as well-known. It’s not really the personality type of people in this field to… Now I’m generalizing a lot here, but still – many are a bit hesitant to stand up and say, “This is something everyone should do,” or “This is something I want to share.”
I don’t see much openness. People are generous within their closest networks, but not when it comes to sharing more broadly, to stand up for issues they think are important. Do you recognize that?
Petra Schedin Stergel: I agree, absolutely. I see it too. As a profession – or “guild,” which I sometimes call us – I don’t think we’re very generous when it comes to sharing. People like to show the good things, they like to point out “this is the right way to do it.”
And I think part of that is because we’ve often had to fight to build a platform where we can succeed in our roles. And then it becomes important to protect that platform. To show, “Look, this worked.” We’ve built it in our organization, or in our role. And I think that sometimes makes people hold back from being more open.
Anna Carlsson: To hold on to it. Not to keep up appearances, exactly, but more because you want to protect what you’ve built.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Yes, exactly. I think people want to show they’ve succeeded, that they’re competent. But what I believe you’re getting at – and I agree – is that the real strength comes when you’re willing to share what it took to build that platform, or role, or outcome. To share both the challenges and the successes, the good methods as well as the difficulties. That’s when our profession will really grow stronger, I think.
Anna Carlsson: And that’s kind of why this podcast exists – to be able to share. But even here it’s been a challenge. A few years ago I really tried to find someone willing to come on and share a failure from a digitalization project. But no one wanted to. Eventually I gave up. People don’t come forward with that.
But if anyone listening now wants to share how they drove a project into a ditch – please do! Because chances are you’ve corrected it since then. Nobody gets it perfect from the start. We need to acknowledge our mistakes, our weak spots. And that’s why I also love having Emira here – because we bring different perspectives, and we reflect in different ways. And that’s really the point.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Yes, exactly – it’s about daring to share for real. That’s what actually makes us better. It’s very hard to become truly great if you never fail. Otherwise, you might think you’re great, but it’s not proven, if I can put it like that.
Emira Blomberg: And it must also be because, I mean, as individuals we can accept that it’s okay to fail. But if you’re punished for it, if there are negative consequences in the organization, then it’s hard. This really needs to be anchored with the CEO and throughout the entire leadership chain.
Because otherwise it’s like when our moms told us, “It’s what’s inside that counts,” but we all knew that society still rewarded appearances. It’s the same here – if failure is punished, then you won’t get that openness.
And none of us want to fail – we all want to succeed. But I think this is a really tough cultural nut to crack: to make it natural that failure is okay.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Absolutely. But I think it’s one of the most important responsibilities you have as a leader, as a senior professional. For me, it’s always been vital to make sure people aren’t afraid. You have to dare, you have to feel safe that no one will scold you for trying.
What I find harder to accept are those who don’t try. That, I can be a tough boss about. But if you make an effort and it doesn’t work out – it would be foolish not to support that.
So yes, I agree: it has to start from the top and be present constantly. And it’s our job as senior professionals to pass that mindset on to the younger ones and to each other.
Like I said earlier – we’re not surgeons. No one is going to die if we make a mistake. At worst we say, “Oops, that didn’t work, let’s redo it. Sorry.”
Anna Carlsson: Redo it, do it right.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Redo it and do it better – and that’s a good thing.
Anna Carlsson: So, what do you see as the biggest challenges right now – for HR in Sweden, in your perspective?
Petra Schedin Stergel: Well, there are many. One is about position – what role should we take, what responsibilities? And I don’t mean just in the management team, because to me it’s obvious that whoever is ultimately responsible for a major organizational area should be in the management team – including HR and people topics.
What I mean is something bigger: what stance should we take regarding what we contribute? Are we responsible for operational tasks? Are we a strategic partner contributing to discussions across different areas, not only within people topics? That positioning issue is definitely a challenge.
Another challenge is that a lot is happening right now. And I say that as someone who has worked in this field for a long time. In recent years, there have been many new, demanding changes in legislation that we’ve had to catch up with and integrate into our processes and ways of working.
On top of that, there are entirely new ways of doing things – digitalization, AI, automation. We need to be on top of that, we need to be ahead. We constantly have to ask: What’s the next new thing that we’re expected to be ready for? That is a challenge. And not everyone chose this profession because they were interested in those questions.
Anna Carlsson: No, exactly, I recognize that.
Petra Schedin Stergel: And that creates a bit of friction between what’s now necessary to focus on, and what people thought their work would be about – what they’ve historically worked with. There’s a kind of movement going on, and expectations that we should be part of that movement. And yes, that’s challenging.
Emira Blomberg: But isn’t that also a difficulty in HR? Because some tasks we do entirely on our own – like payroll runs, we don’t sit down with a manager for that. But then there are other tasks where collaboration with managers is crucial.
And then it depends so much on the manager’s own capability. If managers are strong strategically on people topics, then maybe they need more support with everyday operations. But if they’re good executors but weak strategists, then HR needs to take more of that role. Isn’t that a huge challenge?
Petra Schedin Stergel: Yes, of course – it always depends, if I can put it that way, on “which customer you have.” It’s always a challenge when you’re working closely with someone and trying to add value.
In all the HR departments I’ve led, my vision has been that we should both pull and push managers in a certain direction, and also deliver the material they need in order to act. The problem is, managers often don’t see that we have both of these roles – that we’re both strategizing to move them forward and delivering processes and tools. That’s what makes it so challenging.
And that’s why HR offers such incredible opportunities – we move from strategy to operations to administration.
But here’s another point: a lot of HR professionals prefer to focus only on the strategic dimension. But it doesn’t work like that. We must deliver on the administrative too – whether it’s pay audits, salary reviews, preparing performance review materials, or whatever it may be.
Because credibility comes from delivering on all three levels. Maybe not every individual does it all in their role, but as a function – we have to.
Anna Carlsson: There’s just so much happening right now. That’s really the challenge, as you say. Yesterday I was in a network discussion and we talked about exactly this. Everything depends so much on the organization’s structure, maturity, type of employees.
In that conversation we focused on digitalization. And digitalization is just one challenge among many, but since we work with it, we see how it cuts across everything. It’s part of a paradigm shift in how we work.
So, the big questions are: How much space should it take? How should we handle it? And what do we do if people didn’t choose this profession with digital skills in mind – but now suddenly it becomes a requirement? Everyone needs to have some level of digital capability, with AI and data moving forward. How do we handle that, both as professionals and as employees in organizations?
Petra Schedin Stergel: That’s absolutely a challenge. As we said earlier, people chose this career path often because of other interests – and now this new demand is placed on them. But of course, it’s not unique to HR – every profession is experiencing this.
I think what we need to do is find a way to sort things out for ourselves. My view is that with digitalization, automation, AI in different forms – we don’t need to master all the technical details. But we must understand how these tools can strengthen what we’re here to do.
What do we want to achieve? And how can we use these new tools to help us reach that? How can they provide insights that help us make better decisions? How can we automate tasks so we free up time for the parts of our role that are closer to why we chose this profession in the first place?
That’s how I think about it. And I also increasingly talk about HI – Human Intelligence. To put that on the table next to AI. It’s not either/or. For HR to feel confident about our future, it helps to know that we bring HI to the table – our human insight, our understanding of values, creativity, skills, how people react. That’s our unique contribution.
AI is in the other hand – of course, it’s the enabler, the tool, the working method. We need to understand structures and outcomes, not become IT technicians.
The key is to combine HI and AI. And for me, it’s vital that those two run in parallel.
Anna Carlsson: Is that the feeling you’re picking up now, when you meet people?
Petra Schedin Stergel: Yes, I get the sense that people aren’t as afraid anymore. Before it was, “What is this? Where will it take us?” But now people have started testing it. They understand how to use it at a basic level. They’ve tried out insights from analyses and seen how they can support decisions and choices.
So, while there are many different perspectives – because HR is a large and diverse field – I feel people have settled a bit more. They may not know a lot yet, but they’re not as scared.
Emira Blomberg: I think people are starting to understand what AI can do, but there’s still very little understanding of AI’s limitations.
Petra Schedin Stergel: That’s absolutely true. And that’s an important conversation we need to keep having. I’m one of those who thinks we should keep questioning when to use AI. Just because we can, doesn’t mean we should always do it.
We should choose AI for the situations where it really adds value. There are processes we shouldn’t touch, because they already work really well. And in those cases it’s more important that you and I are present, having a human dialogue, even if some of that could theoretically be replaced by AI functions.
Emira Blomberg: Exactly. And we also need to train our ability to review, assess plausibility, and think critically. Because here’s the classic example: if you ask ChatGPT how many L’s there are in “parallel,” it might confidently say “three.” It sounds so convincing – but it’s wrong. And that’s an easy error to spot.
But what about the errors that aren’t obvious? That’s where we really need to ground ourselves in what AI can contribute, but also its limitations.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Exactly. For me, it comes down to two things: having a critical mindset, and recognizing our human intelligence – HI – as our unique contribution.
Maybe one day AI will replace parts of that too – I don’t know. But right now, HI is our distinct value, and we should nurture it.
I want HR professionals to feel confident that we are important in organizations – for employees and for the success of the business, now and in the future.
The worst thing I can imagine right now is an HR profession that goes around wondering if we’re obsolete, if we’re unnecessary, if we should all retrain as ski instructors in two years.
Emira Blomberg: That’s what Anna’s going to do.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Yes, I know Anna already has that plan! But seriously – this whole discussion about “Will HR even exist in a few years?” What good comes out of that?
Anna Carlsson: It all goes back to fear, doesn’t it? I was watching the launch of Sweden’s national digitalization strategy recently, and one of the areas was digital competence, including AI competence. The point was that everyone needs the ability to question and to understand enough to trust the technology and know what it really is.
That’s also something we emphasize in our training program – not just what AI can do, but also its limitations, and how it works. And I notice that many organizations jump straight to, “We need to use more AI!” because leadership says so. But they forget that AI might simply be a system with AI components.
The more important question is: What are we trying to achieve? What challenges do we have? And how can these new tools help us achieve our strategy? That’s the step we need to take now – to question and to understand.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Exactly – it’s not about using AI at any cost. It’s about using it for something we actually want and need, to achieve a result. Usually that’s a business goal, or an organizational target, or sometimes an individual objective. AI is just one way to get there more effectively and powerfully.
Anna Carlsson: And what I also find interesting is that recently I saw a Swedish region that had developed a new strategy – they called it an “HR Tech Strategy” or digitalization strategy for HR. And in it, they had very clearly embedded the digital perspective directly into their HR strategy: to actively use new tools. That’s still pretty rare to see. Today, it’s a very modern perspective to really look at how we should develop all HR employees so they can embrace this. And I also believe there was a comment about how we don’t actually ask for this competence when we recruit new HR professionals into our organizations.
We often say that not everyone needs to be highly technical, but at the same time everyone does need to have some kind of basic understanding.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Absolutely!
Anna Carlsson: And then maybe we also need someone who has a bit more…
Petra Schedin Stergel: I’m convinced that we also need people who have that extra layer of knowledge within HR for these areas. And of course, all of us will need to raise our knowledge level when it comes to AI and everything that follows from it. Absolutely.
But moving from being an HR Business Partner to some kind of role that only presents insights based on AI analyses – that’s not what we want to see. What we want to see is how we can become better in the roles we already have, using the insights that AI gives us.
That said, of course we will also need some people who are sharper in this area – to make us “ordinary” HR users, if I can put it that way, really good.
Anna Carlsson: So what is being discussed the most in HR Sweden right now, or whatever we should call it? I mean, people are still debating terminology. But what’s top of mind, now that AI has become a little less heated? What are people worried about in general, or what are they spending their time on?
Petra Schedin Stergel: Well, it’s hard to get around the new legislative changes. Right now, they take up a lot of time as organizations try to adjust their processes to meet new expectations – for example, the Pay Transparency Directive. Those kinds of changes matter a lot, and they take time.
Then I also think people are reflecting a lot on competence supply. Not all industries are affected yet, but in some it’s becoming difficult to find resources at all. In others, it’s about finding the right specialists. The tech industry has been struggling for a long time, but now even sectors like hotels and restaurants are facing challenges just to find staff. And that’s something new for us.
Of course, I’m aware that unemployment is rising at the same time, and it’s a complex animal. But competence supply is increasingly seen as decisive. And sometimes we’re reminded that Sweden really is a small country. This issue is just as pressing for large companies competing internationally as for smaller companies competing globally – being able to attract the right skills to stay relevant. That’s very much alive as a topic.
Anna Carlsson: I find that so interesting – that we have such high unemployment, and yet we have a skills shortage. Somehow we’ve ended up in this situation. Partly because the world around us has changed so quickly, with all the sustainability shifts, the digital shifts, but also because of changing attitudes toward what jobs are considered valuable in Sweden.
Petra Schedin Stergel: I get a newsletter every day from the Confederation of Swedish Enterprise, just like many others. And in it, they’ve been discussing how the restaurant industry in particular is struggling to fill open positions.
There are lots of applications coming in – but many aren’t genuine. People aren’t really applying; they’re just submitting an application through an app, almost like a formality. And I think that’s a glitch in the system. They’re not actually looking for the job. That makes things very challenging, no doubt about it.
Emira Blomberg: Definitely in the restaurant industry. Covid really broke the system there. So many people were laid off, and a lot of them looked out for themselves, retrained, or chose other paths.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Exactly. And that’s completely understandable from an individual perspective. But I think the systems around us haven’t really caught up. From the Employment Agency’s expectations on job seekers, to unemployment funds, to employers’ offers and potential employees’ expectations – structurally, we haven’t kept up.
We were forced to learn a lot very quickly during and after Covid. And I’m not sure all the surrounding systems and structures have adapted yet.
Emira Blomberg: Right. And another thing – having control of your labor market data. Very few organizations do. From a competence supply perspective, recruitment or staffing often becomes reactive. You create a “request” for a role, and then you’re expected to deliver on it – regardless of whether those skills even exist.
My takeaway would be: keep track of labor market data. And also recognize this: with AI moving in, many junior roles are at risk of being automated. If we don’t think about things like graduate programs, traineeships, or entry-level pipelines, then we’re shooting ourselves in the foot. Because that’s how you build the competence supply from the ground up.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Absolutely. At last year’s HR Days 2024, we were already talking about this: how should HR prepare for the effects of AI, digitalization, automation? What will HR functions look like? What resources do we need? How many people?
Should we accept cutting 30% of staff just because tools allow us to work 30% more efficiently? As an HR Director, I would never accept someone telling me that – “you have to reduce by 30%” – just because of efficiency gains. That’s not optimal if you want to choose your own focus areas.
But you’re right: the roles most affected by AI and digitalization are often entry-level roles. Those positions where graduates come in, take on part of a process, and learn how everything fits together in our field. If those entry points disappear – what happens to all the students coming in, who need to get to know and understand organizations, at least from an HR perspective?
Anna Carlsson: That’s really the heart of the competence supply question. And from my perspective, we still aren’t very good at using data in general. You mentioned labor market data, and I was glad that the national digitalization strategy also emphasized sharing data more openly to identify trends and shifts.
But the reality is, we haven’t put enough effort into understanding our own data. Everyone talks about AI – but AI depends on the data we have. The foundation should be a solid internal data strategy. And that’s often missing from the agenda.
And that’s one reason why, when you compare Sweden to others, we’re not at a more advanced level of digital maturity. We think it’s enough to have process support, without realizing that the real value comes when we turn data into insights.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Exactly. And I also think people sometimes miss the point that this isn’t just about finding solutions or making things more efficient. This gives us a chance to rethink our ways of working. Maybe we shouldn’t just do the same things faster – maybe we should flip things around entirely and choose new approaches.
Anna Carlsson: Like turning everything upside down – imagining how we’d design it if we could build from scratch today.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Exactly. Now that we have these new muscles to lean on.
Anna Carlsson: But you also have to take it step by step. One thing AI has taught us is that you only really see the possibilities once you start experimenting. You learn by trying.
And it’s the same with digital tools or data strategies. First you dip your toe in, then you wade in deeper, then you start swimming – and eventually you realize, “Okay, that approach wasn’t so smart, let’s step back and redo it.”
I see more mature organizations going through that phase now – reevaluating their choices, and with more strength because they’ve already gone one round.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Yes, and that’s an appealing way to work – trying, testing, evaluating, then finding a new path. That’s how we’ve done things in most areas. And I think it’s the right approach.
Emira Blomberg: I also hear a lot of discussion about whether, with AI, HR will move “up” or “down” the value chain. Will we gain more influence or lose it? Personally, I think it’s not about up or down – it’s horizontal. I think we’ll move sideways.
And that’s actually a big opportunity. Because those are the famous silos – not just between HR functions like L&D not talking to recruitment, but also in how we support managers. Imagine the added value we could create if we had more time to be present in the organization, to walk alongside managers, to see their everyday reality.
That’s where I see a future trend – horizontal movement, rather than vertical.
Anna Carlsson: Which connects back to what we said: AI and digitalization shouldn’t just be seen as efficiency drivers. We still need teams that create added value and smarter organizations.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Exactly. For me, it’s about seeing the whole picture and being able to move across that bigger landscape. That’s what’s needed if we’re going to do this well.
That’s why I sometimes say HR’s role is also as an organizational developer. Someone who moves in and out of different areas. Sometimes we have our own defined responsibilities – of course we should own those.
But our unique perspective – understanding both people and organizations together – is something no one else in the company has. And we should use that more broadly, for the health of the whole organization.
That might mean gathering resources from different areas, bringing people together to talk about the key issue for the organization right now. We don’t always have to own or solve it ourselves – but we can create the forum.
And with AI and digitalization helping us produce insights and materials, that role becomes even more important.
Anna Carlsson: I’ve been on vacation recently, and I read a book that you contributed to – the anthology called With Empathy and Strategy.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Yes, we usually just call it the HR Anthology.
Anna Carlsson: Right! And in it I gained some insight into why our profession has developed in the way it has. I realized that a long time ago there was a deliberate choice to establish HR as a specific educational track in Sweden. And maybe that’s why we’ve become a bit protective of our boundaries.
I’d recommend that even suppliers and others outside the profession read it – it really helps you understand.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Absolutely. It brings together insights from excellent specialists, researchers, and practitioners. It looks at HR both historically and in terms of future perspectives. It gives explanations – and also food for thought about who you want to be and how you want to work.
Anna Carlsson: And that’s really where we are now – having to decide who we want to be. As we wrap up, what expectations do you have for those joining our upcoming training? What should they take with them?
Petra Schedin Stergel: As we’ve talked about here today, it’s about understanding the field, the potential, and above all, letting go of the fear that still exists in some places. Realizing this can actually be fun. It doesn’t have to be deadly serious. You’re allowed to play, to test things, to have a more relaxed approach.
And that helps you feel safer – to go out and put on those “AI glasses” sometimes in your everyday work.
Anna Carlsson: I remember when we had Josefin Erséus with us – do you remember? We were talking about AI, and she made this analogy: when charter flights started in the 1970s, airlines worked hard to build trust. They explained everything – what sounds you’d hear, how the plane worked.
That’s how I see this training – helping people build that sense of safety, so they can move more freely and not feel inadequate.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Exactly.
Emira Blomberg: And speaking of competence challenges, here’s another issue – age discrimination. Too often we say “no” to young people, but also “no” to older people.
I think we need to be more self-aware about this. Seniors have the luxury of not taking everything too seriously – they’ve been through things before, seen failures and recoveries. Whereas juniors are often insecure overachievers, lacking trust capital, eager to prove themselves. For them, everything becomes deadly serious.
That’s why I think we should really value hiring seniors, and mixing them with juniors. It makes such a good combination.
Anna Carlsson: A mentorship between them.
Emira Blomberg: Exactly. That way we get that mix – the perspective of “it’s not the end of the world.” Things will work out.
Anna Carlsson: And that’s the key – being secure, not afraid. Fear makes you cautious, it preserves the status quo. And that’s not what we need – not as individuals, not as a profession, not as organizations. We need courage.
That’s why training like this is so valuable – a safe space to gain insights, to test things, to take risks without real consequences. Especially for those who don’t want to reveal gaps in their knowledge. It’s like a bubble where you can practice – so that later, you’re more confident out in the real world.
And if you don’t join the training, then at least find other “bubbles” – communities where you can expose your insecurities, admit what you don’t know, and have those conversations. We need a more open climate. We need to ask more, and share more.
Petra Schedin Stergel: We’re all incompetent sometimes. That’s just part of the deal.
Anna Carlsson: True. Do you have any final advice for our listeners?
Petra Schedin Stergel: Yes – be brave. We shouldn’t be so afraid. Nothing we do is dangerous. Of course things can go wrong, but then you just redo it. As long as your intentions are good, you should dare more.
Dare to test things! Raise your hand if someone asks, “Who wants to try this? Who wants to join?” Say, “I’ll do it.” Try things out.
And also, sometimes you need to stick your elbows out a little. Take space. Have an opinion. That challenges both the situation and yourself – and that’s how you grow.
So my advice is: be brave, stick your elbows out. And don’t take it all too damn seriously. Be kind to each other, and then we’ll have good development in our field. What we’re doing is really exciting.
Anna Carlsson: I’m already looking forward to doing a follow-up next year – to see where we are then. Because these are changing times, and we have to learn to live with that tumble-dryer feeling.
Petra Schedin Stergel: Yes, I think that’s something we’ll all need to get used to. New things will keep coming. That’s the everyday reality – and we shouldn’t fear it.
Of course, after many years, I sometimes feel a bit tired of constantly having to learn and adapt. But there are always areas that interest you. Then you focus there, where the new things are coming.
Emira Blomberg: Maybe it’s more about going back to our real human nature. Industrialization spoiled us a bit – with predictability and measurability at every turn, where we were just cogs in the machine.
Now it’s more like the savannah again. You don’t know what tomorrow brings. Suddenly there’s a storm – you didn’t expect it. Back then we were more agile.
Anna Carlsson: And our only job was to find food for the day and stay safe.
Emira Blomberg: Exactly. To survive, move forward, and find happiness and joy. Maybe this tumble-dryer world will actually be better.
Petra Schedin Stergel: I think so too. There are so many new opportunities – and I like seeing them. It feels freeing, and you get to influence. That’s exciting. So yes, I believe in sunshine on the savannah.
Anna Carlsson: That’s the perfect ending for today. Thank you so much for joining us!
Petra Schedin Stergel: Thank you – it’s been a pleasure to be here.
