Forecasting which HR changes CHROs will fund before an advisory firm sets practice priorities
The people practice was hiring on partner conviction. Survey and CHRO evidence now shows which HR changes buyers expect to fund, by sector and size.
- Challenge
Practice investment decided on partner conviction, with no evidence of what CHROs will fund.
- Approach
Hypotheses, a sector-and-size sample, CHRO interviews and funding signals, cut into a forward view.
- Result
A funding outlook by HR change, sector and size that sets practice priorities.
The situation
Advisory firms' people practices often plan investment from partner conviction and last year's sales. Proposition leads argue for more consultants in HR technology, skills-based workforce planning or pay-transparency readiness, but none can show where CHROs have budget. Trend surveys say what HR leaders find interesting, not what they will pay for, and the CFO signs off the larger changes. Hire ahead of the wrong demand and consultants sit on the bench; hire late and competitors win the early engagements.
The question that mattered
Which HR changes will CHROs fund, in which sectors and company sizes, and where should the practice invest ahead of demand?
What we did
- 1
Turn convictions into hypotheses
Use secondary research to restate each proposition lead's case as a testable claim, such as "mid-sized employers will fund pay-transparency readiness before replacing HR systems".
- 2
Design the sample for segment cuts
Set quotas by sector and company size so each segment reads on its own, and screen for HR budget holders. Ask whether each change is approved, in a business case or only discussed.
- 3
Interview CHROs on funding logic
Ask chief HR and people officers who signs off each change, what the CFO needs to see and what moves it from interest to budget.
- 4
Forecast funding by segment
Combine survey intent, interview evidence and signals such as HR-technology hiring and regulatory deadlines into a funding outlook by change, sector and size, with an invest, hold or partner call for each proposition.
What we delivered
The evidence and working documents the team kept.
- Hypothesis register with the test for each claim
- Survey instrument with sector and size quotas
- CHRO interview synthesis on sign-off routes and funding triggers
- Funding outlook by HR change, sector and size, rated committed, likely or uncertain
- Practice-priority memo: invest, hold or partner, with signals to watch
The outcome
Practice leaders
set hiring plans from the funding outlook, segment by segment
Rejected hypotheses
dropped before they attract headcount
Sector leads
focus partner time where CHROs report approved budget
Watch signals
agreed for refreshing the outlook between surveys
Before approving a new hire, the investment committee now asks which segment's funding evidence supports it.
What changed in the GTM motion
The annual planning round now opens with the funding outlook, and each proposition lead must tie a growth case to a segment in it. Watch signals are refreshed every quarter, so the forecast is updated, not re-commissioned.
Services in this programme
Case studies
More programmes like this
Choosing where to invest before you know what buyers will fund?
Tell us where it is stuck. A founder replies within one working day.