Where Should HR Leadership Sit in a Global Business? How US and European Organisations Are Taking Different Approaches

As organisations expand across markets and regions, the question of where HR leadership should sit is becoming increasingly important.

Historically, decisions about the location of senior HR leaders were often influenced by company headquarters or established organisational structures. Today, however, businesses are taking a more strategic approach, aligning HR leadership and broader HR strategy more closely with revenue generation, growth markets, long-term business objectives and overall business strategy.

This is creating an interesting divergence between the United States and Europe, where differences in market dynamics, talent profiles and attitudes towards technology are increasingly influencing where senior HR roles are based and what organisations expect from those leaders.

Artificial intelligence is adding a further dimension to the conversation. While AI is not the sole driver of change, differing approaches to adoption and risk are increasingly shaping workforce strategies, capability requirements and leadership priorities.

As a result, organisations are not simply reassessing where HR leadership sits, they are redefining what effective HR leadership looks like, and how leaders can support both organisational performance and long-term organisational success.

Why organisations are rethinking where HR leadership sits

For a global business, the decision about where to locate senior leadership has always been linked to where value is created and where key business goals can be achieved. What is becoming clearer, however, is how closely HR leadership is now being aligned with commercial priorities.

In organisations where revenue is increasingly concentrated in North America, there is a growing tendency to locate the most senior HR roles in the US, even when the business is headquartered in Europe. This is not a reflection of any lack of capability in Europe. On the contrary, European HR leaders continue to be highly regarded for their depth of expertise, particularly in navigating complex, multi-jurisdictional environments and highly regulated labour markets.

Rather, it reflects a shift in emphasis. Businesses are increasingly prioritising proximity to their largest markets, their investor base, and potential exit opportunities. In a private equity context in particular, there is often an expectation that leadership teams will be closely aligned with the geography of future growth, which is frequently the US, where the market continues to dominate in scale and deal value.

Over time, this is influencing not just where HR leaders are based, but how organisations define what effective HR leadership looks like, particularly as HR becomes increasingly involved in shaping strategic initiatives, organisational priorities and business outcomes.

Two different leadership profiles emerging

Alongside this geographic shift, there is a noticeable difference in how senior HR leaders in the US and Europe are typically shaped.

In the US, HR leaders are often shaped by broader career pathways, with many bringing experience from consulting, commercial roles or talent acquisition. This often strengthens their business acumen and ability to engage with the C-suite and wider leadership teams, creating leaders who are comfortable operating in a business-facing capacity, with a strong emphasis on stakeholder engagement and commercial impact.

In Europe, career progression is more typically rooted within the HR function itself. This reflects the complexity of the operating environment, where depth of expertise in employment laws, governance, employee relations and organisational design is not only valuable, but essential.

Neither approach is inherently better. However, they often create different strengths in areas such as change management, leadership development, talent management and the delivery of broader people strategies. In practical terms, this can translate into a difference in how confidently individuals operate in ambiguous or fast-moving situations, how they position HR within the broader business agenda, and how directly they engage with commercial decision-making.

As organisations place greater emphasis on transformation, growth, and speed, these geographical differences are becoming more visible in hiring decisions. One of the clearest areas in which these differences are emerging is in how organisations approach artificial intelligence.

The role of AI in the transatlantic divide

Perhaps the most compelling point of divergence, however, lies not in structure, but in mindset – particularly in how HR leaders are approaching artificial intelligence.

Across the US, there is a strong tendency to position AI as an opportunity to enhance productivity, support business growth, improve employee performance and accelerate HR transformation. While there is recognition of risk, it is often secondary to a broader focus on growth and competitive advantage. Studies indicate that management encouragement and organisational support are key drivers of AI adoption, with US firms significantly more likely to actively promote usage.

In the UK and Europe, the framing is often more cautious. Discussions around AI frequently centre on the potential for job displacement, the ethical implications of automation, and the need for robust governance. There is also a stronger focus on protecting employee well-being, preserving company culture and maintaining trust during periods of transformation. This is entirely understandable given the regulatory context and the responsibility HR leaders carry in protecting both employees and the organisation.

There is now clear evidence of a transatlantic gap in adoption. Recent research shows that approximately 43% of US workers report using AI in their jobs, compared to around 32% in Europe.

However, the contrast between these perspectives is meaningful. It reflects a broader difference in appetite for risk and speed of adoption. In environments where the pace of change is accelerating, the balance between caution and action becomes critical.

The challenge for organisations is not simply whether to adopt AI, but how quickly they are prepared to move and how positively they position that change internally. In this context, mindset is becoming as important as capability.

Implications for hiring and talent strategy

These dynamics are already reshaping the capabilities organisations are prioritising when hiring HR leaders.

There is increasing demand for individuals who can operate beyond the traditional boundaries of HR functions. Technical HR expertise remains important, but it is no longer sufficient on its own. Organisations are seeking leaders who can translate complex workforce challenges into commercial outcomes, who are comfortable working with data and technology, and who can lead transformation in uncertain environments while maintaining a positive employee experience.

Roles focused on strategic workforce planning and organisational effectiveness are becoming more prominent, reflecting the need for businesses to rethink how work is structured in an AI-enabled environment. Alongside this, there is a renewed focus on learning and talent development, as organisations look to reskill and upskill their global workforce in response to evolving skill demands. This is driving increased demand for leaders across learning and development and talent management, particularly those who can design programmes that build future capability rather than respond reactively to change.

At the same time, there is a clear expectation that HR leaders will have a well-formed perspective on AI. Increasingly, this goes beyond understanding risk; organisations are looking for leaders who can articulate how AI can be used to enhance productivity, employee engagement and support long-term growth.

What does the future HR leadership model look like?

It would be easy to frame this as a straightforward comparison between the US and Europe, but the reality is more nuanced.

European organisations tend to bring a more structured and considered approach, with a strong emphasis on governance, compliance, cultural sensitivity, local adaptation, and long-term workforce impact. In contrast, US organisations are often moving more quickly, treating AI as a driver of growth and a means of gaining competitive advantage.

Neither approach is inherently right or wrong. However, as the pace of change accelerates, the ability to balance these perspectives becomes increasingly important.

For HR leaders, this means navigating a complex set of expectations: protecting the organisation and its people, supporting innovation, managing restructuring where necessary, and ensuring that organisational change does not come at the expense of culture or employee trust. It requires both a clear understanding of risk and a willingness to engage with opportunity.

Ultimately, the organisations that will succeed are those that move beyond binary thinking, combining the discipline often seen in European operating models with the pace and ambition more commonly associated with the US.

The question for organisations is no longer simply where HR leadership should be located. Instead, it is how to build leadership teams that are aligned to future growth, capable of navigating increasing complexity and equipped to lead transformation at scale.

Whether those leaders sit in New York, London or elsewhere, the organisations that succeed will be those that combine commercial acumen, organisational expertise and the ability to influence at both boardroom and C-suite level while having a forward-looking perspective on the future of work.

Get in touch

If you’re reviewing your HR strategy, considering where senior roles should sit within a global business, or assessing the capabilities needed to support future growth, remote work models, organisational transformation or workforce planning, our team would be happy to share our perspective.

We work with organisations across the UK, Europe and the US to identify and appoint HR leaders who can navigate transformation, drive commercial impact and build future-ready people functions.