The benefits of AI to the workplace appear to be so harmless, but will we be saying the same thing in ten years time?
The concept of an 'entry-level' job almost doesn't even exist anymore. Companies are demanding higher levels of prior experience for their lowest grade jobs, so that graduates are finding it almost impossible to get an 'entry-level' job, even in the field they have studied in. Today's definition of an 'entry-level' job is 4-5 years work experience, a degree, a masters, and a significant portfolio of work. Doesn't sound very 'entry-level' to me.
A study on LinkedIn found that 74% of 25-34 year olds have been rejected from 'entry-level' jobs for not having enough experience, and 72% feel it is harder to land an 'entry-level' job than it used to be.
But why is this case? Why is it becoming harder and harder to land a job after leaving university without nepotism?
Well one reason (and by no means the only reason because there are certainly a few) is the rise of artificial intelligence removing the need for the actual entry-level jobs. If you speak to most people that began their careers before technology made everything so automated (so anytime before the 2000's), there's a high chance their version of an entry-level role was doing the simpler and mundane tasks like data entry, product research, ordering office supplies, filing, sorting mail and organising documents.
These tasks were vital to companies and recent graduates were the perfect hire. But it also gave these recent graduates a hand on the career ladder, connections to those experienced in the industry, and crucially, a foot in the door.
It may have cost a business a little extra money to hire the inexperienced graduates and then subsequently train them, but it was a worthy investment. Those graduates would soon progress within companies to the more senior roles, and could pass on their learnings to the next set of graduates.
Today, however, artificial intelligence does those jobs. There is no need for filing, organising documents, sending mail and manaully entering data. We have AI systems for that now, which save companies thousands, as they no longer need to pay people or train them.
It sounds great, for now. Companies are slimmer, more efficient and more reliable with the advanced tech available to them. The pockets of the most senior employees are far better lined.
But in ten, twenty years, we might start to see a huge experience gap. As senior workers begin to retire, and a company looks to hire or promote from within, who will they turn to? Because the graduates of today won't have had the experience and they won't have the foot in the door. Young people will have found jobs in other industries where they will hire inexperience such as in hospitality or retail, leaving them with little understanding of the corporate world.
The value of experience is higher than ever, and yet it is so challenging to gain any. Unless companies start focussing on investing in inexperienced graduates, the future of our industries could face some serious issues. The short term financial benefits will not outweigh the potential long term damage.
It's not to say there won't be anyone with the necessary experience and capabilities. There are a handful of internships and graduate schemes available to young people, but these are fiercely competitive. The hiring process is becoming longer, more gruelling and more time consuming. Receiving an offer for one of these is a huge achievement.
It's highly unlikely, with the economic strain on society today, that companies will reduce their use of AI in favour of hiring humans again. And it's unlikely they are going to be willing to take risks on someone too inexperienced for a senior role. These two factors could easily result in a shortage of corporate professionals in many industries, and it will be interesting to see how this plays out in a a few years time.
Comments