Deloitte’s 2026 Predictions: Welcome to the Era of "Scapegoat-as-a-Service"
To: The Department of First Things First Subscribers From: Mike, who just read the fine print on the "Future of Work"
Every year, the High Priests of the Consultant Industrial Complex descend from the mountain (or, more likely, a conference room in Davos) to hand us the Stone Tablets of "The Future."
This week, Deloitte dropped their 2026 HR Technology Priorities.
If you read the executive summary, it paints a picture of a sleek, friction-free world where "Agentic AI" orchestrates our talent and we all live in a "Symbiotic Human-Machine Partnership."
It reads like a utopian manifesto. It promises a frictionless, high-tech nirvana. But to those of us actually turning the wrenches, it sounds less like a strategy and more like a very expensive hallucination.
Here at the Department of First Things First, we don't just translate the buzzwords; we follow the money. And when you strip away the glossy PDF veneer of this report, you realize they aren't just selling new technology.
They are selling Accountability Laundering.
Here is the Department’s breakdown of what these trends actually mean—and the one radical shift we need to make to stop them.
1. "Digital Middle Management" (aka Scapegoat-as-a-Service)
Deloitte says:
"We will see the formation of a completely new organizational layer—'Digital Middle Management.' AI Agents will autonomously plan, make decisions, and perform complex tasks."
The Department Take:
This isn't about efficiency. It's about insulation.
The hardest part of management isn't the math; it's the conflict. It’s looking someone in the eye and saying, "No, you didn't get the raise," or "No, your vacation is denied."
"Digital Middle Management" allows human leaders to outsource the guilt.
Old Way: Manager says, "I can't approve this because of budget." (Employee argues with Manager).
New Way: Manager says, "Hey, I’d love to help, but the Agentic Workflow denied it based on the predictive propensity model. My hands are tied!"
We aren't automating work; we are automating the "No." We are building a Teflon Layer of management where no human is ever directly responsible for a negative outcome. It’s the "Computer Says No" sketch from Little Britain, scaled to the enterprise.
2. "Outcome-Based Pricing" (aka The Tax on Success)
Deloitte says:
"The 'per-user' pricing model will come under scrutiny... pressures will accelerate the shift toward outcome-based... pricing."
The Department Take:
This is the most dangerous sentence in the entire report.
For 20 years, we fought for "SaaS" (Software as a Service). You pay for the seat; you use the tool.
"Outcome-Based Pricing" is a casino where the house (the vendor) defines what a "win" looks like.
Imagine if Microsoft Excel charged you $10 every time a formula calculated correctly. You’d go bankrupt in a week.
If a vendor wants to charge me based on "hiring outcomes" or "retention outcomes," two things will happen:
The Goalposts Will Move: They will define "Outcome" in a way that guarantees they get paid, even if the hire quits in 30 days.
The Surge Pricing Model: Watch them introduce "Dynamic Value Pricing." Oh, you need to run payroll during a holiday week? That’s a "High Value Outcome." That’ll be double.
This isn't a partnership. It's a toll booth on your own process.
3. The Counter-Move: "Human in the Lead" (Not Human in the Loop)
So, if the industry wants us to hide behind "Digital Middle Managers" and launder our accountability, what do we do?
We need to reject the concept of "Human in the Loop."
"Human in the Loop" implies the AI is the driver, and we are just the passenger grabbing the wheel when the car steers into a ditch. It’s passive. It’s weak.
As my fellow technologist Cliff Jurkiewicz likes to say, we need to establish Human in the Lead.
This means the human sets the intent, the human owns the outcome, and the AI is just the engine. Here is the "Re-Humanize the Hard Stuff" Protocol I use to fight back:
Rule #1: Automate the "Yes," Own the "No."
AI is great for good news. "Congratulations, your leave is approved!" "Congrats, here is your bonus!"
But for now, I strictly forbid AI from delivering bad news.
If a promotion is denied, a human must have the meeting.
If a raise is 0%, a human must explain the budget.
If you let a bot deliver the bad news, you aren't "optimizing workflow"; you are destroying psychological safety.
Rule #2: The "Show Your Work" Mandate
If a manager blames the system ("The propensity model rejected your transfer"), they are failing.
We need a policy where no decision can be enforced by an algorithm unless a human can explain the logic, clearly.
Bad: "The system flagged you as high risk."
Good: "The system flagged you because you haven't completed the mandatory compliance training."
If you can't explain the "Why" without saying "The AI said so (or “Computer Says No”)," you turn the Agent off. Period.
Rule #3: Train Managers, Not Just Models
Deloitte wants you to spend millions building "Digital Middle Managers."
Imagine if you took 10% of that budget and spent it on Conflict Resolution Training for your actual middle managers.
The ROI on a manager who can look an employee in the eye and have a difficult, honest conversation is infinitely higher than a bot that successfully dodges the question.
The Verdict
Deloitte paints a picture of a "Symbiotic Partnership."
But let's be real. It looks a lot like:
Robots taking the blame.
Vendors taking the credit (and the cash).
Humans hiding under the desk.
We don't need "Digital Middle Management." We need Brave Human Management supported by clean data. We need to stay in the lead.
So, before you sign that SOW, ask yourself: When the bot denies the CEO's expense report, who is going to take the call?
Because I guarantee you, the bot won't have a phone number. And if you’ve been laundering your accountability, you won't have the guts to pick up the phone.
-Mike
Director of the Department of First Things First | Outcome-Based Pricing Strategist
P.S. Justin tried to use "Outcome-Based Pricing" on me yesterday. He said, "I shouldn't get an allowance for chores; I should get a 'bounty' for every sock that (ahem, he left on the floor) I pick up." I told him I’m implementing a "Governance Framework" that charges him rent for floor space. Negotiations have broken down. We are now in mediation (Mom is involved).