Contact Us
Questions, comments, ideas for future content? Contact us below.
Last week, a New York Time article that made me throw up all over myself. Turns out the Fed is using job ads as a basis for interest rate hikes. My God…
????Any recruiter can tell you job postings are a bullsh*t metric for gauging actual job openings.
The quote from the NYT (source):
“For the past year, the Fed has been focused on one measure of the labor market in particular: job openings. Powell has repeatedly noted that there are roughly twice as many vacant jobs as unemployed workers available to fill them.”
The article cites data from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. Cool. But what’s the metric for determining openings? Has to meet 3 conditions, 1 of which:
“The employer is actively recruiting workers from outside the establishment to fill the position. Active recruiting means that the establishment is taking steps to fill a position. It may include advertising in newspapers, on television, or on the radio; posting Internet notices, posting “help wanted” signs, networking or making “word-of-mouth” announcements; accepting applications; interviewing candidates; contacting employment agencies; or soliciting employees at job fairs, state or local employment offices, or similar sources.” (source)
????In other words: jobs ads.
What’s the problem with that? Job postings are not 1:1 with real job openings. Not even close.
Twitter just laid off 50% of their workforce. They have 84 jobs posted this morning.
Meta is laying off 10k workers. They have 373 jobs posted.
No chance all those are real. Still not convinced though?
FTX still has jobs live on LinkedIn, Built In and Google Jobs.
Lingering posting after meltdowns like this are just one scenario. Lots of others why postings and openings are the same:
????”We’ll hire ‘em when we find ‘em.” aka those hires that are so hard & niche they take forever to fill. Or a position is created anytime someone with a skill match is interested.
????”We’ll hire anywhere.” aka advertise this 1 opening in 10 different markets so they show up in geo-based searches.
????”We pre-paid for that slot.” aka when you got a 10 pack of ads, you’d rather pipeline figure needs than light money on fire.
????”We need to hire 10 of these” aka the opposite side, posting 1 job to recruit for a lot of openings with the same skill set.
????”Where else should we advertise?” aka posting 1 job on 5 different sites. How confident are we in the government’s data scrubbing?
????”Someone’s already doing this.” aka when the opening is real but the consultant doing the work now is getting cut. Not a net gain for the labor market.
I’m not saying job posting data isn’t interesting. It’s cool for general market awareness.
????But using job ads to determine monetary policy is absolutely absurd. It’s not accurate enough to be actionable.????
Perhaps Jerome Powell would benefit from a little cross functional work with the Fed’s talent acquisition team. ????
Partner at Hirewell. #3 Ranked Sarcastic Commenter on LinkedIn.
Over the last year, hiring teams have started seeing a wave of new job titles pop up across tech, sales, and operations.
Some are legitimate new roles.
Others are existing jobs with a slightly different name.
And many of them have one thing in common: AI is suddenly part of the job description.
From Go-to-Market Engineers to AI Specialists, companies are experimenting with new roles as they figure out how automation and AI fit into their teams.
But most of these positions aren’t entirely new. They’re evolutions of existing roles.
One role that’s gaining traction is the Go-to-Market Engineer.
Depending on who you ask, it’s either:
In practice, it’s a bit of both.
We recently worked on a role called an Outbound & Go-to-Market Specialist. Instead of traditional RevOps work like reporting and CRM management, the focus was on:
The goal wasn’t just managing sales data. It was accelerating pipeline generation through automation.
In other words, the role was designed to help SDRs and AEs move faster.
One trend is becoming clear: companies aren’t replacing entire departments with AI.
Instead, they’re changing how existing roles operate.
Sales teams still need pipeline.
Marketing teams still need content.
Engineering teams still need to build software.
The difference is that employers now expect candidates to use AI tools as part of the workflow.
That’s why we’re seeing so many job titles that start with “AI.” But that may not last forever.
Right now, AI still feels new enough that companies highlight it in job titles.
But eventually, AI will likely become a baseline expectation, not a specialty.
Think about it like cloud technology or data analytics.
At first, companies hired “cloud specialists.” Now most engineers are expected to understand cloud infrastructure.
The same shift will likely happen with AI.
Instead of hiring “AI-enabled marketers” or “AI engineers,” companies will simply expect employees to know how to work with AI tools.
One challenge with these emerging roles is simple: there aren’t many candidates with real experience yet.
Many of these positions didn’t exist two years ago.
In one recent search, we started looking for a candidate locally in Chicago. Eventually we expanded nationwide because the pool of people with relevant experience was extremely limited.
This is a common issue with emerging roles:
That gap will likely persist for the next few years.
Another noticeable shift is that roles are becoming more hybrid.
Instead of hiring for narrow responsibilities, companies are combining multiple functions into one position.
For example:
Forward Deployed Engineers
A model popularized by Palantir, these engineers:
That used to involve several roles: product managers, engineers, and solution architects.
Now, AI tools allow one person to cover more ground.
Similar changes are happening in other functions as well:
Automation removes repetitive tasks, leaving more strategic work behind.
For employers, the takeaway is straightforward.
Job descriptions need to evolve alongside technology.
Instead of focusing only on traditional experience, hiring managers should consider:
Because in many cases, the perfect candidate with the exact title simply doesn’t exist yet.
We’re currently in a transitional phase in hiring.
AI is changing how work gets done, which means job titles, responsibilities, and expectations are shifting quickly.
But most of these “new” roles aren’t entirely new professions.
They’re existing jobs adapting to new technology.
And as companies continue experimenting with AI, the titles may keep changing.
The work itself, however, is likely to look familiar.