Chuck Gose and Jenni Field revisit the debate over merging CHRO and CIO roles five months after first raising it, weigh whether humor has a real place in internal comms, preview a December book challenging the future of the profession, and dig into new research from the Institute of Leadership on what’s actually on leaders’ minds.
Picking the thread back up five months after discussing Moderna’s HR-and-IT merger on episode 7, Jenni shares three experts’ views from a Harvard Business Review piece: Keith Ferrazzi argues against formal mergers in favor of “teamship,” where HR and tech leaders co-lead with shared accountability, pointing to Gap Inc. and Cisco as examples; Peter Cappelli says a merger can work, but only with a genuinely rare leader who understands both functions; and Kalifa Oliver argues the whole org-chart debate misses the point, urging companies to focus instead on the actual problem they’re solving. Chuck and Jenni weigh in on which view they find most convincing given how the conversation has evolved since May.
Discussing a LinkedIn post by Rachael Warner questioning whether humor belongs in internal communications, Chuck and Jenni distinguish between being genuinely “fun” and trying to be “funny,” and debate whether an organization’s culture, industry, or moment determines whether humor helps or backfires.
Jenni shares her reflections on pre-reading People-First Internal Communication, a book releasing in December, describing how much of the internal comms content she sees online feels narrowly fixated on channels, audience segmentation, and messaging — leaving her, despite having written a book on the subject herself, feeling increasingly disconnected from how the profession is discussed. She frames her own work as being much more about culture, leadership, and creating genuine connection, and welcomes the book’s arrival as validation that she’s not alone in that feeling.
The hosts close by digging into a new member-only research report from the Institute of Leadership, “Leading into the Future,” comparing its findings on leaders’ current priorities and anxieties against the more tactical, channel-focused conversations that dominate a lot of internal comms discourse.
Should companies merge their CHRO and CIO roles to navigate AI transformation? Views differ, according to the HBR piece Jenni shares: Keith Ferrazzi argues against formal mergers in favor of “teamship,” where HR and tech leaders co-lead with shared accountability; Peter Cappelli says a merger can work only with a genuinely rare leader who understands both functions; and Kalifa Oliver argues the org-chart debate misses the point entirely, urging companies to focus on the actual problem they’re solving.
Is there a place for humor in internal communications? It depends on the organization, in Chuck and Jenni’s view — discussing a LinkedIn post by Rachael Warner, they distinguish between being genuinely “fun” and trying to be “funny,” and agree an organization’s culture, industry, or moment determines whether humor helps or backfires.
What does the upcoming book People-First Internal Communication say about the future of the profession? Jenni’s pre-read reflections describe how much internal comms content online feels narrowly fixated on channels, audience segmentation, and messaging, leaving her feeling disconnected from how the profession is discussed despite having written a book on the subject herself — she welcomes the new book as validation that she’s not alone in wanting the field to focus more on culture, leadership, and genuine connection.
What is currently on the minds of leaders, according to new Institute of Leadership research? The hosts dig into “Leading into the Future,” a new member-only report from the Institute of Leadership, comparing its findings on leaders’ current priorities and anxieties against the more tactical, channel-focused conversations that dominate a lot of internal comms discourse.
Jenni: Welcome to Frequency, I’m Jenni Field.
Chuck: And I’m Chuck Gose. Frequency is your go-to for real talk about comms, culture, and employee experience — beyond the buzzwords and straight to what matters. Jenni, I only just learned that our live episode of Frequency at Unilever’s Unite event is also going to be livestreamed — even more exciting. If you can’t make it to Nashville, there’s a virtual option so you can still catch us live on stage.
Jenni: We’ll pop the link in the show notes so people can grab it. Also — as we were prepping for this, one thing I’m trying to learn is to slow down a bit. We were both in bed around nine o’clock last night, in completely different time zones — me in London, you in Las Vegas — and it was glorious.
Chuck: It really was. I got in around nine and just called it. The challenge is the “what am I missing” feeling that comes with slowing down — my wife Kristen’s pointed out that at some point I’ll have to actually say no to things, not just agree with the idea in theory.
Jenni: I got into bed at 9:06 and was thrilled about it, though I woke up at 5am because my brain immediately started listing everything I needed to do. Still, I’d go to bed at half eight given the choice.
Chuck: No nine o’clock bedtimes are happening once we’re actually in Nashville, though.
Jenni: Definitely not. What have you got queued up this week?
Chuck: We’re delving into leadership, humor, the future of internal comms, and the CHRO/CIO merger debate. I’ve got fresh, member-only research from the Institute of Leadership that landed in my inbox yesterday, more on a December book challenging what internal comms needs to look like, and a chat about humor’s place in organizations. But first — Harvard Business Review on whether CHRO and CIO roles should merge. We first talked about this back in May on episode 7, discussing Moderna merging HR and IT. Nearly five months later, three experts weigh in on whether merging the two functions better navigates AI transformation, with three very different takes. Keith Ferrazzi argues against formal mergers, instead advocating “teamship” — HR and tech leaders co-leading with shared accountability — pointing to Gap Inc. and Cisco as examples that worked without restructuring. Peter Cappelli takes a more conditional view: a merger can work, but only with a genuinely rare leader who understands both worlds, otherwise it’s a disaster waiting to happen. Kalifa Oliver argues the whole debate misses the point — companies should focus on the actual problem they’re solving and whether their approach builds people-centered, trust-building systems, not obsess over org charts. Do you think these roles can actually blend, or is Oliver right that the debate is missing the real issue?
Chuck: I lean toward Oliver’s view — the org chart question is a proxy for a harder conversation nobody wants to have about what problem you’re actually solving. Ferrazzi’s “teamship” idea is appealing in theory, but I think it requires an unusual level of maturity and trust between functions that most organizations haven’t built.
Jenni: I agree with Oliver too, and I’d add that Cappelli’s caveat — “only if you find that rare leader” — is doing a lot of work in that sentence. Most organizations don’t have that rare leader sitting around waiting to be discovered, so treating a merger as broadly replicable feels unrealistic. I think the real evolution since May is that this conversation has moved from “could this work” to “under what very specific conditions would this work,” which is a healthier, more honest place to be.
Chuck: Next — should internal comms be funny? Rachael Warner posted on LinkedIn after calling herself a “story hussy” in a newsletter, which sparked a conversation about how risky humor can feel in this space. Is it about being fun versus being funny, and is there a place humor simply doesn’t belong?
Jenni: I think “fun” and “funny” are genuinely different things — fun is an atmosphere you create, funny is a specific joke that can land badly if the audience or moment is wrong. I think humor is absolutely culture-dependent; what reads as charming in one organization reads as tone-deaf in another, especially depending on what’s happening in the business at that moment.
Chuck: Agreed — timing matters as much as the joke itself. Humor right after layoffs lands completely differently than humor during a genuinely stable period, even if the joke itself is identical.
Jenni: Exactly, and that’s the judgment call comms people have to make constantly — not whether humor is allowed in the abstract, but whether it fits this specific moment.
Chuck: Let’s talk about the book you’ve been pre-reading — People-First Internal Communication, out in December. What struck you about it?
Jenni: Lee and Emma asked me to pre-read it, and it’s put words to something I’ve felt for about a year now. So much of the internal comms content I see on LinkedIn is narrowly focused on channels, audience segmentation, and messaging mechanics — and despite having written a book on this subject myself, I started to feel like I didn’t quite belong in that version of the conversation anymore. My own work is much more about culture, leadership, and creating genuine connection through communication — shifting things from chaos to calm, leaning into what an organization actually needs so employees can thrive. It’s rooted in communication, but it’s not the “internal communication” I keep seeing discussed. I never found the right words to post about this myself, so it’s been genuinely validating to see someone else name it clearly in a forthcoming book.
Chuck: That distinction matters a lot — there’s a real difference between managing channels and doing the deeper work of shaping how people experience their organization. I think both are legitimate parts of the job, but treating the channel-and-messaging piece as the whole job undersells what the best communicators actually do.
Jenni: Right, and I think this book might help give language to that broader version of the role for people who’ve felt the same disconnect I have.
Chuck: To close, let’s dig into some fresh research from the Institute of Leadership — “Leading into the Future” — a member-only report that just landed. What’s on leaders’ minds right now, according to this?
Jenni: It’s a useful current snapshot, and what strikes me is how much of it centers on navigating accelerating change and staying authentic through it, rather than the more tactical concerns you often see discussed in internal comms circles. It reinforces the case for the “people-first” framing we’ve just been discussing — leaders are wrestling with genuinely human challenges, not just channel strategy.
Chuck: It’s a good reminder that the conversations happening at the leadership level and the conversations happening in internal comms circles online aren’t always about the same things, even when they’re describing the same organizations.
Jenni: That’s this week’s stories. What’s your freak-out?
Chuck: Honestly, sticking with tonight’s theme — my freak-out is just how much better I feel after actually prioritizing sleep this week instead of pushing through. A small thing, but it’s made a real difference.
Jenni: Mine’s the same — proof that sometimes the boring, obvious advice is still the advice worth taking. Thank you all for joining us this week. All the articles and the book we mentioned are in the show notes — rate and review after you’ve listened, subscribe so you don’t miss an episode, and pass this along to someone who’d enjoy it; find us on YouTube too. Thank you to Poet Ali for contributing the music to the show, and we’ll be back next week with more news, insights and opinions about comms and leadership in workplaces today. Keep tuning in and turning up.
Chuck is a US-based internal communications strategist and the founder of ICology – a community and resource hub for IC professionals. He brings a practitioner lens to every conversation. Chuck is a recognised voice in the industry, a regular speaker and event host, and one of the most connected people in the North American IC world.
Jenni is a UK-based leadership and internal communications consultant, author of two best-selling books, and international speaker. She runs Redefining Communications, a consultancy working with organisations around the world to help them communicate better and close the gap between what leaders say and what employees experience.
