Trends in Job Descriptions

Demand for software engineers is as bad now as it was during the peak of the pandemic. In 18 months, the number of data engineering job openings on LinkedIn has been cut in half. It’s not the end of technical roles, but the data shows demand is changing. Trying to replace engineers with low-code tools and #AI code generators fails. However, most platforms now support technical and nontechnical co-development environments. A new type of technical role has gained traction in businesses. Smaller software and data teams build frameworks and tools for nontechnical developers on a co-development platform that’s available to anyone in the business. Meta and JPMC implemented enterprise-wide co-development platforms and are seeing massive benefits. One or two technical resources are embedded into the nontechnical team to support their development efforts. Solutions are developed faster and more closely meet customer and business needs because domain experts build them. A few advanced R&D teams still operate in the business but focus on building larger, more innovative products. Teams supporting incremental features and internal operations initiatives are going away. While demand is falling in some areas, it’s rising for the embedded, business-facing technical roles. There are three levels: 1️⃣ Domain Expert Technical ICs: Value-centric #data engineers, data analysts, and software engineers who support nontechnical developers and are embedded into their organizations. 2️⃣ Product Manager Engineers: Technical capabilities with deep product strategy expertise. They know what to build and can implement high-value features independently or with a team. 3️⃣ Technical Strategists: Technical experts who work with executive and C-level leaders. They bring data, models, and rapid product development capabilities to the strategy planning and implementation processes. I have taught data and AI strategy, #ProductManagement, and value-centric capabilities to technical ICs for 8 years to meet today's demand shift. Technical roles are evolving, and amazing opportunities exist for people who adapt.

What if the most in-demand jobs of 2026 aren’t defined by title—but by how humans think in an AI-powered world? LinkedIn’s workforce data shows significant growth in AI-connected roles: AI Engineers, Workflow Automation Specialists, ML Ops, Cybersecurity, Data Governance, and roles focused on managing or interpreting AI-generated output. But here’s the trend behind the trend—and it’s what I’m seeing firsthand in executive coaching: ➤ As AI capability rises, human judgment becomes the differentiator. McKinsey & Company reports that demand for analytical thinking, social-emotional skills, and adaptability is increasing as fast as demand for technical ability. That gap shows up every week in leadership conversations I’m part of. AI may change job titles. But it doesn’t change what organizations truly need -- people who can question assumptions, interpret complexity, and lead others through uncertainty. If you want to stand out in a volatile job market, try this: 🔹 Build AI literacy so you understand how tools shape decisions 🔹 Strengthen critical thinking—don’t accept outputs at face value 🔹Demonstrate curiosity and adaptability when the answers aren’t clear The jobs on the rise reward speed. The careers on the rise reward Human Intelligence. #JobsOnTheRise

Research indicates that women only apply for jobs that they think they met all the job requirements and men when they meet 80%. His advice to the women in the audience 👉Apply even if they only meet 80% of the job requirements. I wasnt going to let that comment pass 🙄 My question to him and hiring managers, if we know this research, if we know the barriers 💙what would we and our organization do to change the way we advertise for the jobs to remove this barrier? Would we 🥏Redesign the job description between must have and nice to have 🥏Change the language to include transferable and learnable skills versus experienced skill 🥏Include invitations to apply even if don’t meet all the job requirements 🥏Encourage hiring managers to focus on core competencies rather than rigid criteria. 🥏Avoid overly specific terms that might discourage potential applicants. 🥏Use gender-neutral language to ensure that job descriptions appeal to a diverse audience. 🥏Train hiring managers and recruiters on unconscious bias and the impact of rigid requirements. Help them recognize the value of diverse perspectives. Because The responsibility of inclusion lies with those who have the power to change the system. Agree?

Do-IT Solutions team have partnered with City and Guilds Foundation to undertake an annual Neurodiversity Index. 28% of organisations in 2024 had not reviewed any job descriptions. https://lnkd.in/dKEjtt75 Review job descriptions: To make job descriptions more inclusive and reduce bias against neurodivergent individuals, HR teams should carefully consider language that may exclude or disadvantage those with neurodivergent conditions, such as ADHD, autism, or dyslexia. Here are some pointers to avoid problematic words and improve inclusivity: 1. Avoid vague or abstract terms Problematic words: “Dynamic,” “fast-paced,” “multi-tasker,” “thick-skinned.” Why: These terms can be unclear and may deter neurodivergent candidates who prefer structured environments or have a different working pace. Action: Be specific. For example, replace “multi-tasker” with “able to manage multiple projects with clear deadlines.” 2. Be careful with metaphors Problematic phrases: “Think outside the box,” “hit the ground running,” “wear many hats.” Why: Metaphors can be confusing for individuals who interpret language literally, such as some autistic candidates. Action: Use clear, concrete language. Replace “hit the ground running” with “begin contributing to projects within the first month.” 3. Remove unnecessary jargon Problematic words: “Rockstar,” “guru,” “ninja.” Why: These informal terms may be off-putting to neurodivergent individuals who value clarity and precision. Action: Use straightforward titles and language. Replace “rockstar developer” with “experienced developer.” We will be launching 2024/2025 Neurodiversity Index soon and we need your help. www.doitprofiler.com

2015: If your resume said "Java," I called you. 2025: 200 resumes say "Java." Now what? When I started in tech recruiting, we barely looked at how engineers presented their experience. If you listed the stack we needed, you got a call. Formatting didn't matter. Storytelling didn't matter. Impact statements didn't matter. It was pure supply and demand. That's not the world anymore. Software development job postings have dropped significantly since 2020 (source: The Pragmatic Engineer using FRED data). More engineers. Fewer openings. The result? Recruiters are drowning in nearly identical resumes. What actually stands out now: ↳Clarity over completeness - Don't list every technology you've touched. Show the ones that matter for the role you want. ↳Connection over credentials - We don't just want to know what you built. We want to understand: What problem did it solve? Who did it help? What changed? ↳Impact over activity - "Built microservices architecture" tells me nothing. "Reduced API response time from 2s to 200ms, supporting 10x user growth" tells me everything. The shift: In 2015, your resume was a checklist. In 2025, your resume is your opening argument. The engineers landing interviews aren't the ones with the longest skill lists. They're the ones who can clearly connect what they did to why it mattered. (Image source: The Pragmatic Engineer, using FRED / Indeed U.S. job-postings data, 2020-2025.)

“Men apply when they meet 60%. Women only when they meet 100%.“ We’ve all heard it. We’ve all quoted it. And… It’s wrong. That line comes from an internal HP report from 2014, not a scientific study. It spread because it felt true. But feelings aren’t frameworks. Here’s what research says: The Behavioral Insights Team (2022) and Harvard’s Katherine Coffman (2023) found that women don’t apply less often because they lack confidence. They apply less often because our job ads make them guess. When ads are vague: “proven excellence,” “leadership mindset,” “strong analytical skills” , qualified women are far less likely to apply. Make the expectations concrete, and the gap almost disappears. In Coffman’s experiment, women’s applications jumped by 20 percentage points when the ad listed specific, measurable requirements. Not because women changed. Because the signal did. So if you really want more women in your pipeline, stop fixing women. Start fixing your job descriptions. Here’s where to start this week: 1. Rewrite one key role with clear, measurable, skill-based criteria: describe what someone needs to do, not just who they should be. 2. Separate must-have skills from “nice-to-haves.” Focus on what’s truly future-proof: adaptability, learning mindset, collaboration, and digital literacy. 3. Add a straightforward line: “If you meet most of these skills or have the potential to grow into them, we’d still love to hear from you.” 4. Track your applicant data. Watch who shows up and who finally feels seen.     That’s how inclusion starts, not in slogans, but in structure. And not in personality traits, but in skills. Let’s stop quoting the 60% myth. And start rewriting the rules of how opportunity is communicated. Skill by skill. #SkillsFirst #Recruiting #Diversity #Inclusion #FutureOfWork #Leadership #Hiring #GenderEquality Sources: Behavioural Insights Team (2022). Gender differences in response to requirements in job adverts.London: The Behavioural Insights Team. Coffman, K. B., Collis, M. R., & Kulkarni, L. (2023). Stereotypes and Belief Updating. Management Science, Articles in Advance. Harvard Business School Working Paper. ID! A dark blue graphic with bold white text shows the quote:“Men apply when they meet 60%. Women only when they meet 100%.”The quote is crossed out with a large red “X.”Below, new text reads:“The problem isn’t women’s confidence. It’s how we write the job.”On the lower right, Ute Neher appears smiling, with curly blonde hair, glasses, and a patterned blouse, set against a light background.

I’m seeing a quiet shift in Malaysia tech hiring (that no one is really talking about). Over the past few months, I’ve noticed something interesting in conversations with hiring managers and tech leaders. Companies are not freezing hiring. BUT, they are hiring differently. Here’s what’s changing: 🔹 Fewer roles, clearer intent - Teams are being more selective. Every hire needs to justify impact, not just headcount. 🔹 Broader skill coverage > perfect resumes - Instead of long “shopping list” JDs, companies are looking for people who can cover 2–3 areas well and grow into the rest. Not every single requirement needs to be ticked. There are always must-haves and good-to-haves, and that’s okay. 🔹 Adaptability is becoming a real differentiator - Tech stacks evolve, priorities shift, and those who can adapt quickly stand out far more than those who only fit a narrow box. 🔹 Communication skills matter more than ever - Being technically strong is expected. Being able to explain, collaborate, and influence? That’s what separates good candidates from great ones. For candidates: This is a good time to focus less on ticking every requirement and more on showing how you think, learn, and adapt. For hiring managers: The most valuable hires right now aren’t always the "unicorn" you seek. They’re the ones who can evolve with the business. I am curious. Are you seeing this shift on your side as well? #GritSearch #TechHiring #MalaysiaTech #RecruitmentInsights #HiringTrends #TechCareers #TalentMarket

Microsoft just laid off 9,000 workers—and told them to talk to Ai for comfort. Oof... What I'm decoding behind this move is that this wasn't just more news about yet another layoff. It was a (not so silent) signal about which roles won't make it to 2030. -How I'm Decoding this Signal: Every week, I'm analyzing workforce shifts, role eliminations, and hiring patterns—comparing headlines to the organizational psychology underneath. And the signal here is sharp: Tech isn't "scaling back". It's scaling toward what moves the needle—and away from what doesn't. Entire job categories are being reframed as inefficient by design—especially if they don't tie directly to revenue, automation, or product velocity. The riskiest roles right now? Operational generalists without a direct product tie. These are roles help things function—but not in ways companies can easily measure, monetize, or justify. We're talking: - Agile coaches - Internal comms leads - UX writers not tied to conversion - Innovation managers who host meetings, not build systems - Product ops support that doesn't optimize speed These roles used to be praised for their versatility. Now that same flexibility is being flagged as non-essential. My Prediction as We Near 2030: By the end of this decade, job descriptions will favor roles that do one of three things: - Automate  - Accelerate - Directly monetize If your title can't prove one of those? It's already outdated—even if you're still employed. Your move? - Reframe your title for business survival. "Agile Coach" to Product Efficiency Specialist "UX Writer" to Conversion Flow Designer "Product Manager" to Ai-Integrated Product Strategist -Get closer to the build. Don't orbit the product—embed yourself in how it's made better, faster, smarter. -Make your value undeniable. -Your resume should read like a business case, not a bio. -Your online presence should confirm what you claim you do well. Roles that don't evolve fast will be erased quietly (or not...) Any roles disappearing from your workplaces? How are y'all rebranding before the org chart updates without you? #EndangeredIndustries #EndangeredIndustriesNews #TheDoctorBrandi #Leadership

Generic diversity statements in job ads often backfire. Research shows they can actually decrease applications from candidates of color. Instead, use concrete commitments. A craigslist experiment tested this by adding one sentence to a standard diversity blurb: "We've set a goal of hiring at least one woman or racial minority for every white man we hire." The result was striking: applications from women and people of color increased significantly. And, importantly, it didn't deter white men or lower the quality of applicants. This works because specific goals signal real commitment. Today's job seekers are looking for evidence that your dedication to equity goes beyond platitudes. To attract diverse talent, go beyond boilerplate language: 📊 Set and share specific diversity goals 👥 Be transparent about your current workforce demographics 📣 Highlight concrete actions you're taking to promote inclusion By being clear and specific in your job ads, you can create a more diverse and qualified applicant pool. It's a simple change that can make a big difference! #DiversityInHiring #InclusiveRecruitment #MakeWorkFairBook PS - Stay tuned for this paper from Erika Kirgios, Edward Chang, and Ike Silver - currently under review.