As the Chief Human Resources Officer and Chief People Officer titles reach parity globally, HR leaders consider what the title says about role and influence
For the first time, the Chief Human Resources Officer (CHRO) and Chief People Officer (CPO) titles are equally common among new appointments at Fortune 200 companies — each accounting for 42 per cent of 2025 appointments — according to the CHRO Trends 2026 Report from the Talent Strategy Group. It raises a question that HR leaders might consider but the data may not fully answer: does the specific title on the door actually change anything?
Norm Sabapathy, Vice President of Corporate Services at Cadillac Fairview in Toronto, draws a parallel with finance.
"Over the last 50 years or so, you saw the development of the finance function – there used to be a chief accounting officer and now you have a Chief Financial Officer (CFO), and the difference between the two is dramatically different," says Sabapathy. "I've seen HR on the same path – we’re not all the way there, but to have C-suite level titling for HR and HR reporting directly to the CEO, that's fairly standard right now.”
Evolution of titles towards people, strategy
He points to the "golden triangle" concept – a CEO's two primary strategic partners being the finance and people leaders – as the framework that has done most to legitimize HR's seat at the table. On the CPO versus CHRO question, he leans toward the former.
"I think we’re going to continue to see that evolution of Chief People Officer or Chief People and Culture Officer over Chief HR Officer, because I think the whole humanity part of what we're doing in companies and what people actually deliver and what people expect is really about people."
The title of an HR leader is more a cultural signal than a strategic one, according to Tammy Sergie, Chief Human Resources and Privacy Officer at EHN Canada in Edmonton. "HR professionals have fought for a very long time to sit at that table, and that table has its own norms – the CEO, the COO, and so CHRO is a newly accepted role at the table," says Sergie. "If the C-suite culture is more traditional in nature, you'll see a tendency towards CHRO. In more progressive organizations, you'll see more chief people and culture titles – a lot of it stems from the norms of the executive team, not the HR folks occupying those seats, but the viewpoint on the function by the C-suite and the board."
Title or impact?
Elgie Demchuk, Director of Human Resources at CapitalCare in Edmonton, has held nearly every HR title across decades in both private and public sector roles. "Although the titles are much less in public sector, the roles are much greater and they're more impactful," says Demchuk. "I work with CHROs in the privately-run continuing care sectors, and depending on the size of an organization, we're all doing the same role. We're all managing the same thing. For me, it's not necessarily title, but it's impact and results."
What has mattered most in Demchuk's career is not the designation but the reporting line, she says. She has declined roles where HR sat below finance.
“The HR profession still struggles a bit on how it positions itself, and we have to show our value very early on when we get into an organization – for me, The most important relationship has always been the relationship with the CEO or the chief operating officer,” she says. "If the HR department isn’t viewed as a valuable partner, then they're going to be stuck very much in a process role."
What Sabapathy says he looks for in any employer goes beyond the org chart. "The actual titling of the function, I'm less concerned about,” he says. “It would be more about, does the CEO believe in that golden triangle concept? Set aside the pay. Set aside the titling. Everybody's going to say they believe in purpose and values and that people are their number one asset, but go and try to find some evidence that’s the case."
Strategy is the missing word
With the many different types of HR titles, there’s a key element many are missing, says Sergie. "Strategy is the piece that's missing in a lot of our titles today, so I think Chief People and Strategy is where I would lean,” she says. “Culture certainly could be a part of that variation, but strategy, I think, is missing in a lot of our titles and it really, really belongs there."
Sergie predicts the vocabulary may become obsolete before the profession settles on it. As AI reshapes how organizations approach productivity, she foresees a convergence between HR and technology. "I think the CHRO and CPO are probably a thing of the past,” she says. “I truly feel that with AI and productivity, a lot of our focus is around productivity within a business and optimization, and so I feel like that's where we're heading."
AI transformation in particular involves significant workforce redesign and the title of the top HR leader can change to reflect the evolving role, says Sabapathy.
“I'm called Corporate Services just because after they started putting the commas after everything that fell underneath it, it was getting too long,” he says. “But here are other examples of HR people who have taken on the technology piece, branding, and communications that are complementary, but quite complementary together.”
Looking beyond the title
The collective message from these HR leaders is consistent: don’t let a title drive the decision.
“I’ve been across the map in my career, and the most important thing is always that it doesn't matter what business you're running, it's run by people,” says Demchuk.
Sergie makes the more pointed case. "The greatest value in your career growth is the ability to tell your story, and in order for you to tell the story, you actually have to live it," she says. "What's interesting about titles is they don't always reflect what the actual role is – titles are important, but they’re not the gist of what the job is. Think strategically around what value will this experience add to your profile, to your career acumen."
She adds that people can reshape the roles they step into. "Don't get stuck on the title, because what's interesting is people influence titles too,” she says. “Sometimes you come in and you're able to shape the role into something that it wasn't, and that may come with the evolution of a title."
The Talent Strategy Group's data illustrates how unsettled the field remains. Among 31 Fortune 200 CHRO appointments in 2025, hierarchical titles ranged from executive vice president to managing director, while a 2024 analysis by Benson Executive Search found that 16 of the Fortune 50's top HR leaders carried neither designation. As rising pay for HR executives reflects their growing C-suite influence, compensation is catching up — even if the vocabulary remains varied.
As titles change to reflect the increasing influence of HR and additional strategic responsibilities, it’s a dynamic time for HR executives, says Sabapathy. “It's what makes the job exciting, to be able to connect the dots between various enabling functions in a way that helps drive the business,” he says. “Many finance functions have taken on multiple other things and many CFOs position themselves to be taking on corporate strategy and technology, but in fact the HR function has more of the levers to actually enable it to really happen.”
