Happy Thursday, everyone.
I'm Frank Richardson, an organizational psychologist observing the workplace with curiosity and care. Each week, I share insights to help HR leaders better understand the people behind the processes and build cultures where both individuals and organizations can thrive.
Someone forwarded this? 💌Subscribe to get it fresh, every Tuesday.
Missed an issue? 💬Catch up on past essays.
Curious what else we’re building? 💡Insane Media lives here.
Want your campaign in front of our founder community? 📌Reach out here.
Calm? Consistency? Not in this economy. From burnt-out managers to quietly enforced office mandates, here’s what HR teams are side-eyeing this week:
😩 Manager burnout reaches breaking point
New Gallup data shows only 27% of global managers are engaged at work. Young and female leaders are especially affected, they're overloaded, under-trained, and quietly checking out.
👉 Wall Street Journal
🏢 HSBC tells senior execs: Get back to the office
HSBC is now requiring managing directors to be in-office four days a week. The message is clear: if you're senior, visibility is no longer optional.
👉 Financial News London
👵 Ageism in hiring still rife, especially in Australia
A new report from the Australian HR Institute reveals 1 in 4 employers consider workers over 50 “old.” This despite data showing a 70-year-old today has the cognitive power of a 53-year-old in 2000.
👉 The Guardian
And speaking of effort, energy, and stalled momentum, let’s talk about internal job swaps and why they so often get stuck between good intentions and zero action.
Internal job swaps. Career agility. Talent marketplaces.
It all sounds so modern. So collaborative. So… strategic.
In theory, job swaps promise magic: skill-building, cross-functional learning, fresh energy, and a big shiny retention boost. In my actual experience? They often fizzle into nothing more than a well-meaning spreadsheet and a few awkward coffee chats.
Organisations like the European Central Bank are getting attention for trying to make internal moves easier. But the hard part isn’t getting people interested. It’s getting them to actually move.
Turns out, culture eats HR initiatives for breakfast.
🤝 Supported by Hubstaff
Most teams say they use AI—almost none use it well. Hubstaff’s new research report breaks down 5 proven strategies high-performing teams are using to turn AI into a real edge. From better focus to smarter scaling, this isn’t theory—it’s how the top performers are actually working.
So why do job swaps stall, even when people say they want them? Let’s start with the brain…
We’re wired to avoid risk. Even when a new role looks appealing, most people will cling to the familiar. Behavioural science has a name for this: status quo bias. Add in a little loss aversion (“What if I lose influence?” “What if I don’t click with my new manager?”) and suddenly that exciting internal role feels… dangerous.
Even more importantly, job swaps involve identity work. As Herminia Ibarra explains in Working Identity, career change isn’t just about new tasks, it’s about becoming someone new. People hesitate not because they’re lazy, but because they’re human. Swapping roles means letting go of the version of yourself you’ve built, and that can feel incredibly vulnerable.
Meanwhile, managers often block internal moves out of fear. A Gartner study found that 44% of managers worry that mobility will cost them their top talent. So instead of enabling swaps, they quietly shut them down.
In short? The blockers are psychological, political, and deeply embedded in power dynamics.
Even with good intentions, internal mobility fails when:
Movement is encouraged but unrewarded: If managers aren't recognised for letting go of talent, they won't.
No one goes first: If senior leaders never rotate or role-model agility, why would anyone else?
Transparency is missing: Employees don’t know what roles exist, how to apply, or if it’s “safe” to try.
It’s all talk, no structure: Employees apply, then… nothing. No updates, no follow-up, no process.
According to Harvard Business Review, many employees want to move internally but don’t trust the system. And Eagle Hill Consulting found that while over half of employees see more opportunity internally than externally, only 23% have ever made an internal move.
That’s a pretty clear sign that systems aren't the problem. Psychological safety is.
Here’s what separates the buzzword programs from the real deal:
✅ Visibility: Highlight successful swaps. Create internal case studies. Turn mobility into a story people want to be part of.
✅ Manager accountability: Make internal mobility part of manager KPIs. No more “we can’t lose you” guilt trips.
✅ Coaching and emotional support: Swapping roles isn’t just an HR transaction, it’s a transition. Offer support that reflects the emotional reality of change.
✅ Clear systems: Don’t bury job swap options in obscure HR portals. Create open marketplaces with timelines, criteria, and actual follow-through.
✅ Pilot, iterate, scale: Start small. Test. Learn. Don’t launch a giant program before culture is ready to absorb it.
As AIHR points out, companies that get internal mobility right don’t just retain talent longer, they build stronger, more adaptable cultures.
Internal mobility shouldn’t feel like a corporate scavenger hunt or an awkward favour. Done right, job swaps can spark growth, break silos, and future-proof your people strategy.
But to get there, you need more than a policy. You need psychological safety, visible role models, and systems people actually trust.
Because if no one’s moving, it’s not a strategy, it’s just HR theatre with a budget.
How's the depth of today's edition? |
If something here speaks to you, I’d love to hear it.
Until next week,
Frank
P.S. If you want to get a feature about your own story, reply to this email. If you’d like to reach our newsletter audience (founders, creators, and marketers), click the button below.
💡 Dive into our other newsletters - where psychology meets the creator economy, e-commerce marketing, and Human resources.
|
|
|
|