HR at 50 People vs. 150 People: How Your Role Has to Evolve
The HR role that fit your company at 50 people won't fit at 150. Here's what changes, and what to let go of.
If you lead HR at a growing company, you've probably noticed something. The job you were hired to do isn't quite the job the company needs now. The work hasn't gotten easier. It's gotten different.
Here's the short answer. As a company grows, the HR role has to evolve from running people processes to shaping how leaders lead. That shift rarely happens on its own. It happens when the HR leader and the CEO decide together what HR should own now.
How does the HR role change as a company grows?
At 50 people, HR is often a one-person function doing everything. Hiring, onboarding, benefits, policies, and whatever fire broke out this morning. The CEO still knows everyone by name and makes most people decisions directly.
At 150 people, that model starts to break. There are now layers of managers. Many of them were promoted because they were great at the work, not because they'd managed before. Decisions that used to take a hallway conversation now need a process. And the CEO can't be in every room anymore.
That's the moment the HR role needs to evolve. If it doesn't, HR stays buried in administration while leadership problems grow around it.
What does HR own at each stage?
Every company is different, so treat this as a pattern, not a rulebook.
Company size | What HR owns | What the CEO owns | Where outside help fits |
About 50 | Hiring logistics, onboarding, benefits, basic policies | Most people decisions and the culture, often by default | Payroll, benefits, and compliance vendors |
About 100 | Manager expectations, a first performance process, pay structure | Defining what good leadership looks like here, and letting go of some decisions | Management training and coaching for key leaders |
About 150 to 250 | Leadership pipeline, org design, engagement, succession | Leading the leadership team as a team, with HR at the strategy table | Executive coaching, facilitated leadership team work, and behavioral data such as the Predictive Index |
Notice what moves in each row. HR takes on more strategic work. The CEO shifts from making people decisions to building the leaders who make them. And outside help shifts from vendors to partners.
Three signs your role is ready to evolve
You spend more time running processes than shaping how leaders lead. If most of your week goes to forms, tickets, and logistics, the strategic work is waiting.
Your CEO asks for your input after decisions are made, not before. HR finds out about a reorg or a key hire when it's time to execute it.
Managers bring you the same problems, one person at a time. The same feedback issue shows up on three teams. That's usually a leadership gap, not three separate people problems.
None of this means you're doing the job wrong. It means the company grew, and the role didn't grow with it.
What should HR focus on instead?
A useful frame comes from a 2015 Harvard Business Review article by Ram Charan, Dominic Barton, and Dennis Carey, "People Before Strategy: A New Role for the CHRO." They point to a gap. CEOs say managing talent is one of their biggest challenges. Yet many still rank the HR function well down their list of priorities.
The authors argue the top HR leader should focus on three contributions:
Predict: anticipate how people decisions will affect business results.
Diagnose: find the people issues that are holding performance back.
Prescribe: recommend the people moves that create value.
They also suggest routine administrative work move elsewhere, so HR has room for this. And they make the case that the CEO, CFO, and top HR leader should steer the company together.
You may not have a CHRO title at a 150-person company. The idea still holds. Whoever leads HR can predict, diagnose, and prescribe, if the CEO invites it and the admin load is handled another way.
Why this can't be HR's project alone
Here's the part that often gets missed. An HR leader can't evolve the role by working harder. The CEO has to make room for it.
In practice, this works best as a three-way partnership. The CEO sets the direction for what kind of leadership the company needs next. The HR leader knows the people and runs the plan. An outside partner brings formal leadership development (executive coaching, training, and tools like the Predictive Index) and holds the process, so neither of you has to carry it alone.
Try this: sort last month's calendar
Pull up your calendar from the last four weeks. Sort each meeting and task into two columns: administration and strategy. Administration is running a process. Strategy is shaping a decision, a leader, or how the company works.
Then look at the split. Pick one administrative task you could hand off, automate, or stop doing. Bring that list to your next conversation with your CEO. It's a concrete way to start talking about what your role should become.
Frequently asked questions
How does the HR role change as a company grows?
It shifts from running people processes to shaping how leaders lead. At 150 people and up, HR should be involved in decisions before they're made, not only in carrying them out.
What are predict, diagnose, and prescribe?
Three strategic contributions HBR authors Charan, Barton, and Carey recommend for the top HR leader: anticipate the impact of people decisions, find the people issues hurting performance, and recommend the moves that create value.
Who should drive the change in the HR role?
The HR leader and the CEO together. An outside partner can help by bringing formal leadership development and facilitation.
Where to start
If your role has outgrown the company you're in now, you don't have to figure out the next version alone. Whether you're the HR leader or the CEO, I'm happy to talk through where your leadership practices need to evolve next. Book a 30-minute call with me here.
Kristen Illes is the Principal of 3D Leadership Solutions, where she partners with founders and executive teams at growth-stage companies to build the leadership practices that let them scale.
Comments