Are we hiring for yesterday’s jobs?

In our last article, The Productivity Problem, we looked at one of the more stubborn questions facing UK business: why, despite extraordinary advances in technology, are we still struggling to become meaningfully more productive?

But there’s another question eating away at us...

Has the work itself actually changed as much as we think it has?

Spend enough time reading about the future of work and you could be forgiven for thinking that the traditional job has already disappeared.

AI is transforming roles. Skills are replacing credentials. Organisations are being redesigned around capabilities. Work is being broken into tasks and distributed between humans and machines.

Some of that is happening. But for most businesses we speak to, the picture is rather more complicated than that.

What has actually changed?

The latest evidence from the Office for National Statistics brings some much needed reality to the conversation. By June 2026, around 35% of UK businesses with ten or more employees were using at least one AI technology, up from around 12% in late 2023. That is significant growth.

But the ONS also describes adoption as “relatively shallow”. The average number of AI technologies being used by adopting businesses has moved only modestly, from around 1.4 to 1.6. 

And adoption also varies enormously by sector: 58% of information and communication businesses report using AI, compared with 13% in construction. 

Look at how people are using generative AI and the distinction becomes even clearer. Deloitte has just surveyed 25,000 UK workers. Its findings show that 63% have used GenAI for work, and around a quarter now use it every day.

Yet the most common applications remain remarkably familiar: searching for information and writing emails. 

Half of users report no time saving at all, while only 8% say their job would become much harder without it.

AI has arrived at work. But again, for many people, it hasn't fundamentally changed the work.

Jobs have always evolved

In such a highly reactive environment, there is a real danger of treating every change happening now as unprecedented. But jobs have never been static.

When I went to market to find a Marketing Director in 2006, I was hiring for a fundamentally different job from the one I was hiring for by 2016. Digital channels changed it. Data changed it. Ecommerce changed it. Social media changed it. Customer expectations changed it. The same is true elsewhere.

Finance leaders have taken on greater responsibility for technology, data, transformation and commercial decision-making.

People leaders have moved further into organisational design, culture and workforce strategy.

And commercial roles have evolved as routes to market have changed.

Technology is one part of this. Economic pressure, demographics, new business models, regulation and changing expectations of work are changing roles too.

The World Economic Forum estimates that 39% of workers' existing skill sets will be transformed or become outdated between 2025 and 2030. That is substantial.

It is also worth noting that the estimate has fallen from 44% in its 2023 report. The direction of travel remains the same. But the pace is perhaps more nuanced than some of the commentary suggests.

But we don't need to believe that every job is about to disappear in order to recognise that the remit of many jobs is shifting.

And that creates a very practical question for employers...

Has the work changed faster than the job?

Recruitment gives you an interesting vantage point on this. We see jobs carrying years of accumulated change. 

A business starts with a relatively clear requirement. As it grows, more gets added.

Eventually, we go to market with the accumulated job. Then we look for someone who has done all of it before or can grow into it (in the simplest terms).

The more bespoke the role becomes, the harder that person is to find. We see it often in the searches we’re brought into after a client has tried to recruit themselves.

The reason a business is looking for a unicorn candidate is because it has created a unicorn job.

And the change continues once someone joins, the role can evolve around the company’s needs, developing a skill set that reflects the business more than the wider market.

What are we really recruiting for?

Arctic Shores' 2026 State of Volume Hiring research surveyed 1,105 UK jobseekers and 564 hiring managers. It found that 87% of candidates believe their CV accurately represents their skills and experience.

Only 51% of hiring managers agree.

Then when hiring managers were asked which methods they trusted to predict performance, 74% trusted assessments of a candidate's ability to learn and adapt to change, almost as many as the 77% who trusted assessments of technical skills.

That obviously won't make experience or a CV irrelevant, but it does suggest we need to look further.

A CV is, by definition, a record of what somebody has already done. It can tell us a great deal about experience, but less about how someone will respond to a role that is changing around them.

But where the work itself is changing, recruitment has another question to answer: Are we recruiting someone because they have done the job as it exists today, or because they have the capability to do what the job is becoming?

Those aren't always the same person.

From job description to work

And now we're right in the middle of where the productivity conversation and the recruitment conversation meet. Before automatically replacing someone like-for-like, or adding another role to an organisation chart, there may be value in going back to the work itself.

• What actually needs to be done?
• What capability does it require?
• Which elements belong together?
• Which capabilities need to exist permanently inside the business?
• Which could be developed in the people already there?
• Which could be supported by technology?
• Which require expertise for a particular period rather than indefinitely?

Only then do you get to the question we have traditionally started with: Who do we need to hire?

This is even bigger than AI

AI makes this conversation urgent because it is visible and moving fast. But the bigger picture suggests something more enduring.

The World Economic Forum's research, covering more than 1,000 employers representing over 14 million workers, found that 63% see skills gaps as a major barrier to business transformation. 

Employers expect analytical thinking, resilience, flexibility and agility to remain among the most important core capabilities alongside rapidly growing demand for AI, data and technology skills.

This is one reason I think we should resist the temptation to frame the future entirely around technical skills.

The technology will change. The tools will change.

Some of today's highly sought-after technical capabilities will become commonplace. Others will be superseded.

The capacity to learn, exercise judgement, solve unfamiliar problems, lead people and adapt as the work changes becomes more important in that environment.

And that has implications for how we should recruit.

For more than two decades, Denholm has worked with businesses to understand the capability they need, shape the roles that will deliver it and find the people who can grow with them. Increasingly, that means getting involved before the job description is finished.

If you're replacing a senior hire, creating a new role or questioning whether the role you have today is still the one you'll need tomorrow, talk to us before you draw the box.

Explore our Talent Strategy & Delivery Models, Executive Search, or Contract, Interim & Fractional solutions. Or call us on 03303 359 818 or email connect@denholmassociates.com.

 

More questions you may have…

How do you know when a job needs redesigning?
A job may need redesigning when the work has changed significantly since the role was originally created. Responsibilities may have accumulated, technology may have changed how the work is done, or the role may now require a combination of capabilities that is difficult to find in one person.
Before replacing someone like-for-like, ask what work needs to be done now, what capabilities it requires and whether those responsibilities still belong in one role.

Should you hire for skills or experience?
Most employers need to consider both skills and experience. Experience provides evidence of what someone has already done, while skills, adaptability and learning ability can indicate how effectively they may respond as the role changes. For roles undergoing significant change, assessing someone's ability to learn, exercise judgement and apply their experience in new situations can be particularly important.

Should businesses hire for skills rather than job titles?
Job titles remain useful indicators of scope and responsibility, but they shouldn't define the entire search. Two people with the same title can have very different capabilities, while someone with an adjacent title may have highly transferable experience. Starting with the work and capabilities required can therefore create a broader and more relevant candidate pool than relying on job-title matching alone.

How is AI changing recruitment and job design?
AI is changing some of the tasks within jobs before it changes the jobs themselves. For employers, that means understanding which activities can be automated or augmented, which human capabilities become more valuable as a result, and how the role may continue to evolve. That analysis can change what you recruit for even when the job title stays exactly the same.

When should a business use a fractional or interim hire instead of a permanent employee?
Fractional or interim talent can make sense when a business needs senior or specialist capability without requiring the same capability permanently on a full-time basis. An interim appointment may suit a defined period of change or transformation, while fractional talent can provide ongoing access to senior expertise for part of the working week. The appropriate model depends on the work that needs to be done, its duration and the capability already available within the business.

What should you consider before recruiting a senior role?
Before recruiting a senior role, ask whether you would design the job in the same way if it didn't already exist. Then define the work the business needs done, the capabilities required to deliver it and how those requirements are likely to change. Only after that should you decide what the role looks like and who you need to recruit.