The more we try to control Talent Acquisition, the more fragile we become.

We see this in hiring plans that fall apart when the market changes, or in processes that collapse once applications soar. For years we used VUCA (volatility, uncertainty, complexity, ambiguity) to understand the landscape. We assumed the goal was to manage change better.

But the reality now feels different. It feels brittle, anxious, non-linear and incomprehensible (BANI). Between layoffs, hiring spikes and floods of AI-driven applications, by the time we plan for one thing, it's already changed.

Staying within the boundaries of what we can prove or control makes us weaker. We built TA functions optimised for stability: predictable headcount, repeatable processes, efficiency metrics. But when the ground shifts, those systems don't adapt. They break.

Leading TA today is not about having all the answers. It is about being willing to ask the uncomfortable questions that drag you out of the known and into the unknown on purpose.

I was reminded of this reading about "the creative rollercoaster":

"Working only in the known will take you so far. The work is to step into the unknown, and hold the tension of not-knowing long enough for something genuinely new to emerge."

That sounds abstract, but in TA it's practical. Instead of reaching for new tech when applications spike, sit with the discomfort and ask: "why are we getting so many unqualified applicants?" Perhaps the answer isn't technology, but that our job adverts attract everyone, or we're posting on channels designed for volume, not quality.

If we optimise existing processes, we make our organisations more efficient at doing the same things. That is how you become fragile.

So what does stepping into the unknown look like?

It starts with the questions that are uncomfortable to ask:

"If the CEO was asked 'is TA a competitive advantage or a cost centre?', what would they say and if it's the latter, what are we doing about it?"

"If hiring managers could bypass TA and hire directly, how many would, and what does that tell us about the value we're adding?"

"If we couldn't use LinkedIn or inbound applications for 12 months, how many hires could we really make, and what would that expose about whether we have a strategy or a dependency?"

These questions are uncomfortable to answer. That's the point.

Sometimes the answers reveal constraints you can't immediately fix: budget, politics, or a business not ready to hear them. But the leadership work is to ask them anyway. To hold that tension long enough for something genuinely new to emerge.