For me, one of the most striking findings in the 2026 CPO Pathways report is the shift in the profile of Chief People Officer appointments.

The proportion of experienced people leaders has fallen from around 78% to roughly 53% in 2025. Put another way, almost half of all appointments are now going to first-time Chief People Officers.

Download the full report to explore the data and insights shaping the future of people leadership.

On the surface, there is plenty to celebrate. A first-time CPO can bring clear advantages:

• They often bring a fresher perspective, without the weight of legacy assumptions.
• Many come from strong number two roles, so they have seen a lot of the day-to-day reality across the function.
• They usually bring pace, curiosity, and energy.
• Appointing a first-time CPO can send a positive cultural message about backing potential, internally as well as externally.
• When it’s an internal promotion, they come with a deep understanding of how the business works in practice.
• And, quietly, cost does come into the conversation, even if people rarely say it out loud.

All worth noting, but none of them should be taken at face value (and most with a liberal pinch of salt). CPO hires are rarely straightforward and are even less likely to be based on pure logic. There is plenty of grey space to navigate, and two seemingly similar organisations may have wildly different needs from a
People leader.

From a different perspective, however, an increase in first-time CPOs at a moment of high volatility feels counterintuitive. We are still in a period of uncertainty — stop-start transformations, regulatory shifts, cost pressures, investor scrutiny and organisational reshaping. You might expect boards to default to the classic “safe pair of hands”.

But the data suggests something different: more organisations are choosing potential.

How boards are redefining risk

From conversations with my network, this doesn’t seem to be a softening of risk appetite. If anything, risk awareness is sharper than ever.

Traditionally, a low-risk CPO hire meant someone who had already held the title, worked in a similar environment, and operated at a similar scale/level of complexity. This still has value, but boards are increasingly asking different questions:

• Have they genuinely led through more than one cycle of disruption, rather than just one big transformation?
• Do they have a real grip on data, technology, and the commercial drivers behind the people agenda?
• Can they shape and rebuild a leadership team at pace, not just manage what’s already there?

Seen through this lens, a first-time CPO who has operated as a strong deputy in a complex, high-change environment may feel less risky than a seasoned CPO with narrower experience.

Are uncertain markets favouring experience or opening the door?

At risk of sitting on the fence here, I suspect the answer is both.

In periods of acute crisis or distressed turnaround, boards still gravitate towards battle-tested CPOs who can stabilise quickly. I see this play out a lot every day in Interim appointments.

When the business is in a more strategic phase of change, boards are more open to first-time CPOs who bring fresh thinking, digital fluency and high change energy.

Ownership model plays a role too. PE-backed companies often back strong deputies who understand value creation and can work closely with the CEO and CFO. Whereas listed and regulated organisations tend to be more cautious and favour proven CPOs.

The title itself is becoming less important. Boards are looking behind it.

How is readiness being judged now?

Readiness today is less about the job title someone has held and more about the problems they have already had to solve. Conversations with prospective candidates increasingly revolve around:

• The breadth of their agenda and whether they’ve really owned the difficult people decisions, not just the clean parts.
• Their commercial and data literacy, and whether they can talk confidently about the levers that drive the business.
• How comfortable they are operating in ambiguity, rather than waiting for clarity before acting.
• Their ability to influence, challenge, and show courage when it matters.

Many high-performing number twos already meet these criteria, even if they have not yet held the CPO title.

The interim lens: Derisking potential

Interim is playing an important role in this shift.

Many organisations are using experienced interim CPOs as a bridge: bringing in seasoned capability for a sensitive phase while developing an internal successor. Others are pairing newly appointed first-time CPOs with an interim adviser or fractional CPO to provide capacity, challenge, and support in their first 6–12 months.

There is also a clear distinction: permanent CPO roles are increasingly open to first-time CPOs, whereas interim mandates — especially in high-pressure situations — still favour people who can land and deliver immediately.

The difference is logical: the risk tolerance and time horizon are not the same.

Questions for boards

Boards that navigate this well usually start by asking themselves a few straightforward questions:

• Where do we genuinely need deep, battle-tested experience, and where might potential (with the right support) be the stronger answer?
• If we appoint a first-time CPO, what support would help them succeed from day one?
• Are we placing too much weight on sector familiarity and not enough on transformation capability?
• How does this decision fit into our wider succession and capability plan?

The rise in first-time CPO appointments is a positive sign that the market is widening and boards are prepared to back high-potential leaders. The question isn’t whether to choose experience or potential; it’s how to balance the two — and how thoughtfully you de‑risk the decision.