Three years of survey data from Swedish HR professionals show AI moving from access to everyday use. In 2026, 88% had at least one AI tool paid for by their employer (66% in 2024), 78% used generative AI daily, and 61% had received formal AI training (33% in 2025). The gaps have moved. 53% say HR uses AI tools that are not formally approved, and 70% do not measure what AI delivers. My recommendation is to approve the tools people already use and start measuring the effect.
By Johannes Sundlo, AI & Future of Work Advisor. Based on the AI & HR i Sverige survey of Swedish HR professionals (2024: n=257; 2025: n=461) and humAIn Academy’s AI & HR Barometern 2026 (n=329). Updated 22 October 2026.
What is the state of AI in HR? In 2026 most Swedish HR professionals use AI every day, but few organisations have built it into their HR processes or know what it gives them. 78% use generative AI daily and 88% have a tool their employer pays for. Yet 61% describe their organisation’s AI use in HR as individual tests or pilots, 33% have AI in one or more HR processes, and 70% do not measure the effect. In 2025 the gap was between access and use. In 2026 it sits between use and results.
What does the State of AI in HR survey show?
What does the State of AI in HR survey show? It shows that AI in Swedish HR has moved from access to daily use, while measurement and governance lag behind. It combines my own AI & HR i Sverige survey (n=257 in 2024, n=461 in 2025) with humAIn Academy’s AI & HR Barometern 2026 (n=329). In 2026, 88% had at least one AI tool paid for by their employer, up from 66% in 2024 and 81% in 2025. 78% use generative AI daily. 53% have an AI policy or clear guidelines, up from 27% in 2024, and 61% have had formal AI training, up from 33% in 2025. The gaps are new. 53% say HR uses AI tools that are not approved, 70% do not measure the effect, and only 9% feel well prepared for the AI Act. My conclusion is that the next step is approved tools, clear rules and a simple way to measure the effect.
Key findings 2026
- Daily use is the norm. 78% use generative AI every day, another 15% every week, and 94% are allowed to use it in their HR work.
- Access keeps rising. 88% have at least one AI tool paid for by their employer, up from 81% in 2025 and 66% in 2024.
- Training nearly doubled. 61% have had formal AI training from their employer, up from 33% in 2025.
- Shadow AI is common. 53% say people in HR use AI tools that are not formally approved.
- Few measure the effect. 70% do not measure what AI delivers in HR, and only 5% have defined KPIs.
- The AI Act is not on track. 9% say their organisation is well prepared, and 39% are not prepared or do not know.
What changed in 2026?
Where the 2026 questions match earlier years, access, policies and training all went up. The 2026 survey asked some questions differently, so read the trend as direction rather than exact change.
| Measure | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Generative AI through the employer | 66% | 81% | 88% |
| Allowed to use generative AI at work | n/a | 93% | 94% |
| Organisation has an AI policy | 27% | 47% | 53% |
| Formal AI training from the employer | n/a | 33% | 61% |
| Lack of skills is a top barrier | n/a | 41% | 40% |
| Not enough time is a top barrier | n/a | 41% | 23% |
What is new in 2026?
The 2026 survey added questions on how often people use AI, unapproved tools, the AI Act and measurement. Together they show where the work is now.
How common is shadow AI in HR?
Common. 53% say people in HR use AI tools that are not formally approved, 32% say they do not, and 16% do not know. 65% say their employer pays for Copilot, but people use more than one tool. 69% use Copilot, 60% use ChatGPT and 29% use Claude, while employers pay for ChatGPT in 24% of cases and Claude in 17%. When the approved tool is not the one people reach for, they find their own. I cover what to do about it in the guide on shadow AI (in Swedish).
Are HR teams ready for the AI Act?
Mostly not. 9% say their organisation is well prepared for the AI Act and other AI requirements in HR, 36% are partly prepared and 16% have started to discuss it. 21% are not prepared at all and 19% do not know. AI used in recruitment and in decisions about employees is high-risk under the AI Act, and after the EU’s omnibus amendment those rules apply from 2 December 2027 (Regulation (EU) 2026/1744).
Do organisations measure what AI delivers?
Rarely. 70% do not measure the effect of AI in HR, 16% measure it informally and 5% have defined KPIs. That matches how people describe their organisation’s AI use. 32% say individual tests and 29% pilot projects. 18% use AI regularly in one HR process, 14% across several, and 2% say AI in HR is strategically steered and followed up.
Who owns AI in the organisation?
33% say the leadership team has the main responsibility for AI, 26% say IT and 23% say it is shared. Only 4% say HR, although HR takes part in the work. 14% say HR drives the organisation’s AI governance and 44% that HR is involved, while 11% say HR is not involved at all.
What stops HR from using AI more?
The barriers moved from time to risk and systems. Lack of skills (40%) and information security and GDPR (40%) top the list, followed by integration with systems (33%) and legal uncertainty (28%). Lack of time fell to 23%, from 41% in 2025, although the 2026 list had more options to choose from. On average, respondents rate how safe and effective they feel using AI in HR at 3.8 out of 5.
For context, 35% of Swedish companies with at least ten employees used AI in 2025, according to Statistics Sweden (SCB). The HR professionals in these surveys are well ahead of that.
For 2026 I would do three things. Approve the tools people already use, write down where they may and may not be used, and pick one or two things to measure. If 78% use AI every day and 70% do not measure it, nobody can show what the licences give.
2025 in detail
Key findings (2024 → 2025)
- AI policies nearly doubled: 47% of respondents reported that their organisation had an AI policy in 2025, compared with 27% in 2024. 44% reported no policy in 2025.
- Access surged: 81% have employer-provided generative AI, up from 66%.
- Agents and training: 25% reported using AI agents in HR and 33% reported formal AI training. These measure different things from general AI access.
- Attitudes changed: the share describing themselves as “very positive” was 86% in 2024 and 79% in 2025. The survey does not establish why.
- Job fear stays low: just 7% worry AI will replace their HR job, unchanged across both years.
See also the free AI course for HR and the comparison of AI courses for HR professionals.
AI policy is catching up, slowly
The share of respondents reporting no organisational AI policy fell from 63% in 2024 to 44% in 2025. The share reporting a policy rose from 27% to 47%. These are responses from the two survey samples, not a measurement of all Swedish organisations or proof of what rules employees followed.
Access, agents and training are different measures
In 2025, 81% reported employer-provided generative AI and 93% said they could use tools such as ChatGPT or Copilot. A quarter reported using AI agents in HR and a third reported formal AI training. These figures describe different parts of organizations’ AI work.
The difference between 81% with access to generative AI and 25% using AI agents does not measure unused licences. The questions concern different things. My recommendation is to track the tasks people use the tools for and the support they need.
Which barriers did respondents report?
The most frequently selected barriers in the 2025 survey were lack of technical skills in the HR team (41%) and not having enough time (41%). Budget was selected by 32%, legal or ethical concerns by 30%, technical limits by 28% and resistance to change by 22%. Respondents could select more than one barrier.
Skills and time are the most frequently selected barriers. I recommend setting aside time to practise on work tasks, reviewing outputs and following up what works. This is a recommendation based on the results, not an effect tested by the survey.
Which AI tools does HR use?
Among respondents to the employer-provided tools question (n=362), Microsoft Copilot leads at 77% and ChatGPT at 49%. Google Gemini was selected by 9% and Claude by 4%. Respondents could select several tools; these figures do not represent market shares across all Swedish HR teams.
How did respondents rate their tools?
Among those answering the effectiveness question, 64% rated their AI tools as effective (13% very and 51% fairly). 23% were neutral and 13% rated them ineffective. These are respondents’ assessments. The question does not establish whether technology, training or other factors explain their experience.
The road ahead
Among respondents to the plans question, 77% reported plans to expand AI use in HR (54% within a year and 23% within two to three years). These were reported plans at the time of the survey, not verified subsequent investments.
Attitudes to AI in the two survey rounds
The share describing themselves as “very positive” about AI in HR was 86% in 2024 and 79% in 2025. The survey does not establish why that share changed or how the same individuals’ views developed. Concern about AI replacing their own HR job was 7% in both rounds.
Whose job is AI, anyway?
In 2024, 6% of respondents framed AI primarily as an HR question, 39% as an IT question and 41% as both. In 2025, the corresponding figures were 3%, 39% and 47%. This question measures how respondents frame the issue, not who holds decision-making authority. My view is that HR should work with leaders and IT on how AI changes tasks, skills and responsibilities.
What it means
The survey shows increased access to generative AI and more organizations with an AI policy. A third of respondents report formal training, while skills and time are common barriers. My recommendation is that leaders practise with the tools themselves, make time for their teams to learn, and follow up use in work tasks.
Want to close the adoption gap in your organisation?
If these numbers look familiar, I work with HR and leadership teams on getting from access to everyday use, through keynotes, workshops and change programs.
Frequently asked questions
What percentage of HR professionals in Sweden have access to AI?
88% had at least one AI tool paid for by their employer in 2026, up from 81% in 2025 and 66% in 2024. 94% are allowed to use generative AI in their HR work.
How often do HR professionals use AI?
In 2026, 78% used generative AI daily and another 15% weekly, according to AI & HR Barometern 2026 (n=329).
Do Swedish organisations have AI policies?
53% had an AI policy or clear guidelines in 2026, up from 47% in 2025 and 27% in 2024. Another 20% said a policy was being developed.
Is shadow AI common in HR?
Yes. In 2026, 53% said people in HR use AI tools that are not formally approved, 32% said they do not and 16% did not know.
What are the biggest barriers to AI adoption in HR?
In 2026, lack of skills (40%) and information security and GDPR (40%) topped the list, followed by integration with systems (33%) and legal uncertainty (28%). In 2025, lack of skills and lack of time topped the list at 41% each.
Are HR professionals worried AI will take their jobs?
Few are. 7% worried AI would replace their HR job in both 2024 and 2025. The 2026 survey did not ask this question.
Methodology
The 2026 figures come from AI & HR Barometern 2026, a survey run by humAIn Academy between 8 June and 24 September 2026. It had 333 responses, of which 329 answered the questions reported here. 54% of respondents work in the private sector and 38% in the public sector. HR managers and People Directors (29%) and HR business partners (22%) are the largest groups. People chose to take part, partly through paid social ads, so the sample leans toward HR professionals who already use AI. That likely pushes up figures such as daily use. Several 2026 questions were worded differently from 2024 and 2025. Access is measured as tools the employer pays for, the policy question includes clear guidelines, and the list of barriers had more options. Read the year-on-year comparisons as direction rather than exact change.
Figures are from the AI & HR i Sverige survey of HR professionals in Sweden, run by Johannes Sundlo: 257 respondents in 2024 and 461 in 2025. These are two survey rounds; the counts must not be added together as unique people or treated as a panel following the same individuals. Percentages use the people who answered each question. The employer-provided tools question in 2025 had 362 responses and allowed multiple selections. The 2025 survey added questions on AI agents and formal training, so there is no 2024 comparison for those measures. The results describe the respondents and do not establish representativeness or cause and effect. Collection dates and recruitment details are not documented on this page. For practical guidance, see AI adoption that sticks and AI for HR.
How to cite this survey
Suggested reference: Johannes Sundlo, State of AI in HR: Sweden 2024–2026. Research and methodology. Survey samples: 257 responses in 2024 and 461 in 2025 (AI & HR i Sverige), and 329 in 2026 (AI & HR Barometern 2026, humAIn Academy).
When quoting a percentage, include the survey year and the measure. The 25% figure concerns AI-agent use in HR, not all AI use. The two sample sizes must not be added together as a count of unique people. For question wording or further methodological details, contact Johannes Sundlo.
