Contact Us
Questions, comments, ideas for future content? Contact us below.
I asked ChatGPT to make a list of jobs that AI will create. Here’s what it told me:
And like a dozen more. Notice anything?
These jobs already exist, it just tacked on AI. Well, maybe not the ethicist. And we know that’s the last thing to get budget.
I expected it to say construction jobs for data center creation & nuclear power engineers. I like to write with the Rule of 3 and I was stuck, so that’s why I asked.
But this little exercise made me realize 2 things:
👉The “AI won’t replace [job title], but a [job title] using AI will” line is nonsense.
Last week Kalshi aired an ad during the NBA Finals that was entirely created with AI.
Honestly, it’s an absolute banger. And it cost only $2,000 to make.
You could say “See? A video producer with AI *did* replace a video producer without AI!” But you’d be completely missing the forest for the trees. It undoubtedly replaced *dozens* of people. That literally is taking away jobs.
And you also have to account for how this will affect what companies can charge, and therefore, pay. Earlier this year the Goldman Sachs CEO said that AI can draft 95% of an IPO prospectus in minutes. Do we really think market forces will allow someone to get paid the same for doing 5% of the work? Or that we need 95% of the documentation writers?
👉No one cares about quality as much as they say.
What happened to your inbox is what’s going to happen to everything. Poorly customized clutter. And no one will care.
“Done is better than perfect” used to be my go to phrase for getting something 90% of the way there and pushing it out. Still is, honestly. I write my posts/blogs 1 hour before I send them. I’m sure they would be better if I took a week on them.
But spending 10x the time for the last 10% still doesn’t make sense. Nothing that I post is really that important.
AI changes that phrasing. It’s now “Done is better than mediocre.”
Here’s what AI and people have in common: they both suck at attention to detail.
Had I thought about it a minute longer, my Rule of 3 examples would have been data center construction, nuclear power engineers, and proofreaders of AI generated writing.
Someone’s gotta look over sales proposals, job descriptions, performance reviews, customer support articles, and contracts, right?
What happened to your inbox will happen to everything. Job descriptions and performance reviews are already a copy & paste hellscape. AI puts that on steroids.
And no one will care! We’ll become just as desensitized to more important documents, like pitch decks and (dare I say) contracts, that hack jobs become the norm.
Because proofreading sucks. Not many are detail-oriented enough to do it on a consistent basis.
AI hallucinations will be missed. But the business world will make it up in volume.
Partner at Hirewell. #3 Ranked Sarcastic Commenter on LinkedIn.
If you’re hiring in 2026, you’re dealing with two realities at the same time.
First, traditional signals like degrees and pedigree are losing their value.
Second, Gen Z is reshaping expectations around speed, transparency, and trust.
Together, those forces are pushing talent acquisition into its next evolution.
As we outlined in Agentic HR Is Here: What Talent Acquisition Really Looks Like in 2026, recruiting is becoming more autonomous at the execution level. But autonomy alone doesn’t solve the core hiring problem.
You still need a better way to evaluate people.
That’s where skills-first hiring comes in.
For decades, degrees were used as a shortcut.
Not because they reliably predicted success, but because they reduced perceived risk and simplified decision-making.
That logic no longer holds.
Roles are changing too fast. Job titles mean less than they used to. And in a market where AI can generate a polished resume in seconds, pedigree is an even weaker signal.
Companies need capability, not credentials.
The bigger shift isn’t just skills-based hiring. It’s skills intelligence.
Instead of organizing work around static job descriptions, companies are starting to think in terms of capabilities. Work is assigned based on skill, not hierarchy or tenure.
This is the same evolution happening across workforce planning more broadly. Not headcount planning, but capability planning.
And it’s the only model that holds up in a fast-moving market.
Skills-first hiring is gaining traction because it solves multiple problems at once.
It improves quality of hire.
It increases internal mobility.
It reduces bias tied to pedigree.
And it aligns better with how work actually gets done.
But it’s also accelerating for a more practical reason.
The resume is no longer reliable.
As we covered in The AI-on-AI Hiring Arms Race, recruiting teams are now dealing with a flood of highly optimized, AI-generated applications. Many look great on paper and collapse under real scrutiny.
When that happens, skills-based evaluation stops being a “nice to have.” It becomes the only way to restore signal.
Now layer in Gen Z.
By 2026, Gen Z is one of the fastest-growing segments of the workforce. They are also the least tolerant of slow, opaque hiring processes.
One of the most important data points in the market right now is this:
A majority of Gen Z candidates will drop out if a hiring process exceeds 22 days.
Speed, to them, isn’t about impatience. It’s about competence.
If a company can’t run a clear, efficient hiring process, candidates assume it can’t run the business well either.
It’s a trust issue.
A large percentage of job seekers report that looking for work negatively impacts their mental health. The biggest driver isn’t rejection.
It’s silence.
Waiting to hear back. No closure. No clarity on next steps.
For Gen Z, that lack of transparency is a dealbreaker. It signals misalignment, not just poor communication.
In 2026, how you hire is inseparable from how you’re perceived as an employer.
For Gen Z, the hiring experience is part of the offer.
They expect:
If the process feels like a black box, they assume the culture is the same.
This is where skills-first hiring and agentic systems intersect. Technology can speed up execution, but only leadership can ensure the experience remains human.
The companies adapting fastest in 2026 are focused on a few fundamentals:
Skills-first hiring isn’t just about fairness. It’s about accuracy.
And Gen Z isn’t asking for special treatment. They’re forcing employers to modernize a hiring process that’s been broken for a long time.
The companies that adapt will hire better, faster, and with less churn. The companies that don’t will keep blaming the market while losing candidates to competitors who simply run a better process.
Most companies agree with skills-first hiring in theory. Very few have operationalized it in a way that actually improves outcomes. If you want help redesigning your hiring process for 2026, especially around skills-based evaluation and candidate experience, we can help. Reach out and we’ll walk you through what’s working right now.