The AI Shift: Has AI made it harder for Gen Z to find jobs?

This article is an on-site version of our The AI Shift newsletter. Premium subscribers can sign up here to get the newsletter delivered every Thursday. Standard subscribers can upgrade to Premium here, or explore all FT newsletters

Welcome back to The AI Shift, our weekly exploration of AI’s impact on jobs. This week, we’re considering how AI is affecting young people’s transition between university and the world of work. We sat down with someone whose job puts him right at the intersection of education and the labour market: Jonathan Black, head of careers at the University of Oxford and FT contributor. We were curious about the trends he’s seeing, and how employers, students and university career services are trying to adapt to them.

John: I’m interested to know what you’re seeing in terms of employment outcomes for graduates. Are things starting to look different to where they were, say, two, three years ago, in a way that suggests AI is having a role?

Jonathan: Well, they’re certainly looking different. I don’t believe it’s all AI yet. Frustratingly, we’re still two years behind [in terms of “graduate outcomes” data] because it measures what people are doing 15 months after leaving. But even at Oxford we have seen a dramatic fall in the percentage of students going on to get graduate-level jobs, particularly for undergraduates, somewhat for masters students, but not for PhD students — they seem unchanged. The effect is strongest in humanities, but it is affecting all subject disciplines. And it’s not just Oxford — the whole Russell Group [universities], similarly, there’s been this decline.

Sarah: What do you think is going on?

Jonathan: There are fewer jobs out there. So two years ago, we would have had 7,000 vacancies advertised on the Oxford system. Obviously we’re not the only source of jobs, but it’s one measure. And it’s all sorts of jobs. It could be internships. It could be permanent. It could be full-time, part-time. This year we’ll probably hit 4,000 to 5,000 vacancies. Which is the lowest we’ve had since the 2009 banking crisis.

Sarah: Wow.

John: And for students who are in the process of looking for those jobs, or even internships, are you hearing that their experience of that process is now different because of how recruiters and employers are using AI?

Jonathan: Yes, in that I think increasingly they’re using AI for initial screening. That drives students mad. Well, it would drive anybody mad. A few years ago we had the recorded video interview, which someone would then watch. Now, we’ve got AI just watching them and scoring them. It’s just dispiriting — you know they put all this effort in and in three seconds get the automatic rejection.

Some of the students, especially on the finance and economic side, are playing the arms race [and using AI to apply to jobs]. We’re seeing more students coming saying: I’ve made like 50 applications, I’m not getting anywhere. We had a student last year saying “I needed an internship. I made 150 applications.” I mean, they can’t be good quality. They just can’t.

John: I guess the sheer volume of applications changes what the recruiters and employers need to do, but also how that might give rise to an increased sense of rejection.

Jonathan: What we’re now trying to say to employers and to students is: you’ve got to meet people. I’d love to see the resurgence of in-person careers fairs. We already run eight, and I do know employers who come to the stand, and at the end of the day have said “I’ve met a few good students. I’ve taken their names.” Because in five or 10 minutes, as we know, you can get a good impression, and maybe they still have to go through the system, of course, to apply, but at least someone’s looking out for their application.

Sarah: Are some employers leaning back into the idea that a bit of face-to-face early on in the process is worthwhile for them as well?

Jonathan: Yeah, some of them are. I think increasingly we’re trying to push them to that.

John: A question I’m sure you get asked all the time by parents is: what should I tell my children to do? What skills are going to be the skills of the future?

Jonathan: Look, we can’t predict the future. Five years ago, who knew what was coming now? If you’re in lower-sixth [age 16 and 17], you’re talking about predicting jobs in six or seven years’ time. I think we can guess the health service will still be here and government will be here, but in terms of the skills you need, the usual mantra is ‘study what you love because you’ll do well at it’ but I think that has to be tempered a bit now . . . One of the good things about the British system is you can read theology and still go into banking, for example, [but] you’re going to have to do a lot of work outside the curriculum. You need those other employability skills. You need to demonstrate those other skills. We had a student years ago who got a job with Disney in Los Angeles, a really good job actually. And we asked Disney, “Why did you appoint her?” They said: “Because she worked at McDonald’s. So, she knew about how to turn up on time, stay all day, work hard, come back tomorrow, work with the public. All those things we value.” Too often people overlook that.

So the answer to what should they study? Well, what they like. If they’re tossing up two, I’d probably err on the sciences rather than the arts. But if you’re a historian, that’s great. I mean, you know, you’ve got to read and digest enormous amounts of material in two days, and present it and defend it, and then do the same again next week. That’s what a lot of work is, isn’t it? So you develop those skills and you develop them without realising it. But you also develop networks and how to work with people and all of that.

Sarah: How do you think the careers services at universities should change?

Jonathan: We’re just about to change our name from Career Service to just Careers. We want to get away from being a service which is, you know, you take your car for a service. You don’t expect the technician to come around and start talking to you about your driving ability and so on. So we don’t want people coming up thinking, “Oh, can you just have a look at my CV?” I mean, we can do that, but we’d rather talk more about capabilities. It’s about repositioning within the university and within our client base and within employers, in order to say: this is about the 45 years after they graduate. It’s more than just getting that first job.

John: Is there any sense that there’s more entrepreneurialism now that we have AI? We’re hearing reports that young, talented tech graduates are just firing up start-ups left, right, and centre. Are a bunch of people at Oxford beavering away on what could be the next killer app?

Jonathan: The headline is no. But that’s not for want of trying. There seems to be this belief that if we build all these buildings, or we convert all these buildings for start-ups, and create all these training grounds, it will happen. But back to the graduate outcomes data: less than 1 per cent of [2024 leavers from Oxford] undergraduates did a start-up. They’re just not interested. A) they don’t know anything [about the start-up sector]. And B) they’ve never worked for somebody who’s going to be their customer. What we do want them to be is innovative and creative. That is definitely a skill, but everyone wants that. The government wants it, local councils, the police, wherever you go to work, they want you to be entrepreneurial. But at least by 30 you kind of know which way’s up. I mean anyone can start up a company in the next 10 minutes . . . but that’s not the point. Our students, they want experience, they want on-the-job training, and they want money. They’ve got a debt to pay back. So you don’t have to do it [start up a company] straight away, but we do want you to be innovative and entrepreneurial.

Recommended reading

1. I really enjoyed Michael Pollan’s book A World Appears, which is partly — but not entirely — about whether machines can ever be conscious. (Sarah)
2. Technology writer Jasmine Sun has a deeply reported article on the politics of the US data centre boom, and if you’ll allow me a special summer non-AI pick, do read Saloni Dattani’s stellar essay on the unsung medical advances extending human longevity (John)

I really enjoyed Michael Pollan’s book A World Appears, which is partly — but not entirely — about whether machines can ever be conscious. (Sarah)

Technology writer Jasmine Sun has a deeply reported article on the politics of the US data centre boom, and if you’ll allow me a special summer non-AI pick, do read Saloni Dattani’s stellar essay on the unsung medical advances extending human longevity (John)

Recommended newsletters for you

The Lex Newsletter — Lex, our investment column, breaks down the week’s key themes, with analysis by award-winning writers. Sign up here

Working It — Everything you need to get ahead at work, in your inbox every Wednesday. Sign up here