AI is appearing on job descriptions everywhere, with SEEK reporting references to AI skills in job advertisements growing by 60.4% year-on-year. However, this doesn’t necessarily mean employers are suddenly looking for armies of prompt engineers.

Talent’s latest AI research found 49% of professionals now use AI every day at work, with 71% using it at least weekly.

With AI use very quickly becoming the norm in the workplace and if everyone can simply open ChatGPT, Copilot or Claude, simply saying you “use AI” doesn’t tell an employer much anymore.

So, what separates someone who can just use an AI tool from someone who can use it well?

We asked two of our recruitment experts what they’re actually seeing from employers and candidates: Joseph Petrovski, Account Director from the Talent Melbourne office, and Elliott Howard, Account Director from Talent Sydney headquarters.

Their answer is more nuanced than “learn more AI”.

AI is everywhere on job descriptions, but hiring demand tells a more complicated story

There’s a gap between how often AI appears in the language of hiring and how often it’s significant enough to be the deciding factor.

Elliott shares:

“AI is listed on almost every job description we receive from clients. However, I don’t believe this is being translated into real-world demand yet.”

Employers increasingly value experience with tools such as Copilot, Cursor and other LLM-based platforms, and some financial services organisations are experimenting with AI agents through proof-of-concept projects. But explicit AI capability is rarely a prerequisite for the cyber, architecture and infrastructure roles he recruits.

Joseph sees something similar:

“Our clients are actively demanding candidate skillsets relevant to their technical or functional ecosystem. This hasn’t changed. Using AI as part of their role is viewed as an extension of their toolkit.”

That lines up with our wider research. While 44% of organisations are upskilling existing employees in response to AI, only 16% say they’re changing the skills they hire for.

In other words, employers aren’t necessarily replacing established technical or functional requirements with a new set of “AI skills”.

They’re increasingly expecting people to apply AI to the skills they already have.

The tool isn’t the skill, it’s what you do with it

Knowing your way around an AI platform can help but knowing why you’re using it is more valuable.

Joseph describes strong AI capability as being able to use the technology “to achieve outcomes faster without obscuring the business value you are tasked to deliver”.

Someone can generate code, analyse information or draft a document faster with AI, but speed means little if the output solves the wrong problem, creates risk or needs to be completely redone.

As AI handles more of the execution, Joseph believes the differentiator shifts further upstream:

“AI has accelerated the execution of milestones. Now, the differentiator becomes the ability to define the right problem, critically assess and validate what AI actually produces to achieve a useful outcome.”

Tools will change, so becoming an expert in one specific platform may not be the smartest long-term career strategy.

Instead, the ability to understand a problem, choose the right approach, interrogate an output and connect the work back to a business outcome travels with you.

As Joseph puts it:

“You are always accountable for the result, not AI.”

If you want to prove you’re good at AI, show what you’ve done with it

There’s also a difference between saying you can use AI and demonstrating it.

Elliott is seeing some candidates go much further than basic prompting by getting hands-on with AI agents and automation.

He points to examples of network engineers building and training AI agents to automate repetitive parts of their work. What stands out isn’t necessarily the platform they’ve chosen, but the curiosity to experiment and the ability to apply the technology to a genuine problem.

That curiosity becomes a much stronger signal than adding a list of AI tools to the bottom of a CV.

If you want to demonstrate AI capability, think about the evidence behind it:

• What have you automated or improved?
• What used to take longer?
• How did you validate the output?
• What business or customer problem did it solve?
• Where did you decide AI wasn’t appropriate?
• What did you learn from building or testing it?

Elliott says explicit AI skills aren’t yet being systematically tested in many of the interviews he sees. Which means candidates who can bring their own concrete examples into the conversation have an opportunity to make their capability tangible and really stand out.

AI may make critical thinking more valuable, not less

There are a lot of discussions about which skills and jobs AI could make obsolete.

Our research points to another side of the equation.

Loss of human judgement was the number one concern respondents had about using AI at work. And 57% identified relying on AI outputs without checking them as one of the highest-risk workplace behaviours.

Both Joseph and Elliott see critical thinking becoming more important as a result.

For Elliott, it becomes particularly relevant in cyber security and financial services, where a confident AI-generated answer can still create very real consequences if it’s wrong.

Joseph says employers are looking for candidates who can deal authentically with conflict and ambiguity, define the right problem and assess whether an AI-generated answer is actually useful.

He says:

“AI has accelerated the execution of milestones. Now, the differentiator becomes the ability to define the right problem, critically assess and validate what AI actually produces to achieve a useful outcome.”

Strong candidates aren’t outsourcing their thinking.

According to Joseph, some of the best users also use AI to challenge their own work by validating outputs, generating alternative problem statements and bringing different perspectives into projects or stakeholder discussions.

That’s a simple and much more sophisticated capability than getting a polished answer from the first prompt.

Don’t become an AI expert, become better at your job with AI

So, what should professionals actually be doing?

Elliott’s advice is to get hands-on. Take advantage of training, explore the tools relevant to your field and experiment with practical applications such as agents and automation. The goal is to understand what AI can do, what information it needs and where it can remove repetitive work.

Joseph approaches it from the other direction:

“I would tell candidates to focus less on trying to become experts in a particular AI tool and focus more on where AI can add value within their field.”

Together, they offer probably the most useful and realistic career advice in the current AI market: Experiment widely but specialise in your domain.

Learn what the technology can do, build tools and processes, test it against real problems, and really understand its limitations, but don’t lose sight of the expertise employers were hiring for in the first place.

For a network engineer, AI doesn’t replace networking expertise.

For a cyber security professional, it doesn’t replace security judgement.

For a software engineer, it doesn’t replace understanding architecture, users or the problem the software needs to solve.

AI can accelerate the work but he value still comes from knowing what good work looks like.

The hiring signal is changing

AI capability is increasingly becoming part of the baseline rather than a standalone speciality.

The question has quickly moved from: “Can this person use AI?”

To: “Can this person use AI to make their expertise more valuable?”

The candidates who stand out won’t necessarily know the most tools or have the longest list of AI certifications.

Instead, they’ll be able to show where AI improved an outcome, explain how they validated the result, recognise where human judgement still mattered and take accountability for what they delivered.

Because as AI becomes easier for everyone to use, the human capability around it becomes more valuable and harder to differentiate.

See how AI is reshaping skills, work and workforce planning across Australia and New Zealand in Talent’s latest AI findings.

The Microsoft Partner market in North America is becoming less forgiving of generic offerings. Traditional time-and-materials implementation services are still important, but Partners are under growing pressure to productize industry specific AI services, prove ROI faster, and position themselves around business transformation.

However, that doesn’t mean every Microsoft Partner is suddenly becoming an AI consultancy. With pressure to productize AI services, prove value faster, and show clients they can do more than deliver conventional professional services, the market is asking Partners for sharper propositions, clearer ROI, and more commercially aware talent.

As Dylan Cohen, Managing Director – Microsoft & Cloud Solutions at Talent New York, puts it:

“Clients are no longer asking, ‘Could you do this?’ They’re asking, ‘Have you done this, and what were the outcomes?’”

And that question is reshaping the way Microsoft Partners go to market, the roles they’re prioritizing, and the type of candidates that stand out.

It’s also exposing a bigger divide in the market: the partners with a clear point of difference are becoming easier for clients to trust and easier for candidates to buy into.

The rise of industry-specific AI offerings

One of the clearest shifts Dylan has observed is the market moving away from broad AI messaging. Saying “we do AI” is not enough. The stronger position is: we solve this problem, for this type of client, with this proof behind us.

Microsoft Partners are no longer trying to be everything to every client because broad positioning is becoming harder to defend. Clients want to know exactly where a partner has depth, what problem they solve better, where they’re developing specific solutions around industries, functions or repeatable business challenges. Whether that’s an AI solution for insurance workflows, finance operations, supply chain visibility, customer service automation or ERP process improvement.

“Already having a purpose-built solution brings a lot of credibility,” Dylan explains. “These are partners who have created actual AI products or specific offerings, not just custom-built processes.”

This is particularly relevant for businesses that have spent the last 10–20 years building expertise in a specific vertical with established IP and can leverage that domain as a platform for AI-led growth. Rather than starting from scratch, they can build AI capability around existing relationships, proprietary knowledge and proven client problems.

For overseas Microsoft Partners entering the US market, Dylan warns against a common mistake: trying to launch as a generalist.

“In this day and age, that’s just not going to work,” he says. “You’ve got to have a differentiator.”

In practical terms, that means being clear on the industry, client problem, service line, IP, or delivery capability the business wants to be known for.

And that differentiator matters to both clients and candidates. The best talent in the market want to know what a partner stands for, where it’s going, and why its proposition will win.

From AI hype to AI proof

Over the last 18 months, AI has rapidly moved from boardroom curiosity to commercial expectation, but Dylan is careful not to overstate where the market really is.

There’s more AI work happening. More partners are building services around Copilot, Power Platform, Azure, data, security, automation, and industry-specific use cases. But there’s still a gap between all that market noise and proven delivery.

Dylan explains:

“What people aren’t talking about enough is that it’s okay to feel like you’re behind on AI. There’s a lot of noise out there. Some companies are saying they’re the best at this, but they may only have one case study, and that might be the only AI project they’ve actually done.”

This is where proof points have become the differentiator. The winners are showing where they’ve implemented an AI solution, what business problems it solved, and what the measurable return looks like.

A year or two ago, it was enough to say, “Here’s what Copilot can do.” Now the stronger conversation is, “Here’s what we have done for a similar business, here’s the ROI, and here’s how we can apply that to your environment.”

AI readiness starts with data readiness

For all the momentum around AI, Dylan is clear that many clients are still missing a crucial first step: clean, well-governed data.

“Every company looking at AI needs to look at data governance and clean data first,” he says. “More often than not, clients want to use AI but have messy and incomplete data.”

For Microsoft Partners, this creates an opportunity to go beyond the end solution. The strongest AI offerings provide a holistic solution helping clients understand whether their data environment is ready, what needs to be cleaned up, and where AI can realistically create value.

Big Four investment is raising the bar

Another sign of where the market is heading, Microsoft and EY are investing more than $1 billion over five years to help organizations move beyond AI experimentation and into scaled enterprise execution. The initiative combines Microsoft’s technical depth with EY’s industry and transformation capability.

As Dylan puts it:

“This matters well beyond the Big Four. You have to be pretty naïve to think it doesn’t force other partners to raise the bar. When the Big Four are pushing it and Microsoft is investing in them, that’s clearly the direction.”

While it doesn’t mean every Microsoft Partner needs to replicate a Big Four model, it does mean the market is moving toward execution, accountability and measurable business outcomes. Clients want partners that can help them move from pilots to production, candidates want employers that are position to compete in that world.

But a sharper proposition only works if the talent behind it can deliver. Partners need people who can sell the vision, implement the solution, communicate with clients, and keep the business relevant as customer expectations shift.

The roles most in demand in North America

For Dynamics 365 partners, strong implementers remain highly sought after across D365 Finance & Operations, Business Central, and CRM.

“Good implementers are always in demand,” Dylan says. “That’s the bread and butter.”

What’s changing is the premium placed on candidates who can bring AI, Power Platform, automation or production-level transformation experience into that delivery environment. Candidates who have automated client processes, supported AI proofs of concept, or taken AI-related solutions into production are standing out.

On the Azure, data, AI, security, infrastructure and app modernization side, Dylan is seeing especially strong demand for sales professionals with existing relationships, deep Microsoft ecosystem knowledge, AI literacy and proven solution-selling capability.

Dylan says these candidates exist but aren’t easy to attract:

“At the end of the day, with the emergence of AI, the human aspect and the role of sales is still number one. You need people who can uncover specific pains, build relationships, and create a solution the client maybe didn’t even know was possible.”

This is especially important as partners move into more specific AI, ERP and transformation offerings. The more specialized the proposition, the more important it becomes to have salespeople who can translate that proposition into a client’s actual business problem.

Commercial awareness is becoming a candidate differentiator

Technical strength will always matter, but in Microsoft consulting, delivery roles are becoming increasingly commercially exposed.

As Dylan puts it:

“Being a great ERP implementation consultant is no longer enough. Being able to grow the account by spotting Phase 2 opportunities, identifying additional business challenges, suggesting improvements, and helping shape change requests is becoming an expectation.”

Rather than overselling or pushing unnecessary work onto a client, the best consultants are leveraging their technical and functional knowledge to identify where additional work can genuinely create value.

For candidates, this ability becomes a meaningful differentiator. Those who can point to examples where they expanded work with an existing client, improved a process, or identified a valuable next phase will have a much stronger position in the market.

For employers, this changes your hiring brief. Partners need consultants who can do more than deliver the task in front of them; they need people who can understand the client’s world well enough to identify what should happen next.

The strongest Microsoft Partner candidates are technically capable, can clearly communicate with stakeholders, understand business impact, and explain complex solutions in plain language.

Candidates are looking beyond salary

Post-COVID, the Microsoft talent market was heavily salary-driven with niche in-demand candidates moving for the highest number.

Today, while salary still matters and companies are still required to pay market rate, Dylan is seeing more candidates assess the full employer proposition: mission, values, leadership, career mobility, learning, culture, and whether the business is positioned to win over the long term.

“Money is obviously always a big driver,” he says. “But right now, there’s been a shift where it’s not the only thing.”

Some candidates feel safer joining larger firms or businesses making acquisitions. Others are actively avoiding environments where they feel like they’ll become “just another number.”

The businesses successfully attracting talent are clear about their differentiator. They can explain their IP, their industry focus, their leadership strength, their client base, or the type of transformation projects candidates will work on.

The clearer that story is, the easier it becomes for candidates to understand why joining that partner gives them a stronger career path than simply taking the highest offer.

Even with a strong employer proposition, hiring process discipline remains critical. The businesses winning over top talent are clear before they go to market: they know what they need, have an interview process mapped, agree on timelines, and maintain communication even when there are delays.

In Dylan’s words:

“Good candidates are rarely interviewing with only one business. If you interview a candidate and they don’t hear from you until two weeks later, you’ve lost them.”

And it’s a common issue inside consultancies; the same leaders responsible for hiring are simultaneously closing deals, managing existing teams and delivering for clients. A week passes quickly and, in that week, a candidate may receive feedback, progress and an offer elsewhere.

Where Microsoft Partners in the US should invest

According to Dylan, the next 12 months will come back to two key areas:

1. Sales: Partners need solution sellers who can win enterprise clients and translate AI, ERP, cloud, security and automation capability into business outcomes.

2. Leadership: They also need leaders who can retain strong technical teams and create the environment A-players want to join.

As Dylan puts it:

“A-players join A-players. Having the right leaders is one of the biggest game changers and differentiators.”

For Microsoft Partners in North America, two things are true: AI is changing the commercial model, and talent is still the lever that determines whether the strategy works.

The partners that come out on top are the ones who can define their differentiator, prove their value, hire commercially aware specialists, and move quickly when the right people enter the market.

Looking to hire Microsoft talent or benchmark your current strategy? Contact Dylan Cohen and Talent’s Microsoft & Cloud Solutions team to discuss the market, your hiring priorities, and the specialist talent available across the US Microsoft ecosystem.

If FY26 was defined by caution, FY27 will be defined by a different challenge: finding the skills needed to deliver growth, transformation and resilience without blowing the budget.

Across Australia, organisations are still managing costs carefully. Yet cyber threats are escalating, AI adoption is accelerating, digital transformation programs continue to advance, demand across defence and critical infrastructure remains strong, and governments are under increasing pressure to improve service delivery.

That puts commercially minded specialists in the strongest position, particularly those working across cyber security, governance, risk, AI adoption, cloud, data, digital transformation, engineering, financial services, essential services, defence, resources, energy and government delivery.

As Joelle Beaton, Practice Lead at Talent Melbourne, puts it:

“FY27 is likely to represent a selective recovery rather than a broad-based hiring boom, with the strongest demand being for candidates who can combine technical capability with commercial impact.”

Cost pressure will remain, but capability gaps are hard to ignore

Cost versus capability will be the defining workforce challenge of FY27.

Government agencies and large enterprises are being asked to do more with less while simultaneously delivering transformation programs, strengthening cyber resilience, modernising legacy systems and preparing for wider AI adoption.

Steve Tompkins, Head of Government at Talent Sydney, expects contractor spend and procurement decisions to remain under pressure at the start of the next financial year but as he puts it:

“At some point, the conversation has to move from cost to value. Until then, we expect to see more outcome-based engagements as managers seek the security of delivery rather than trying to deliver with understaffed or under-skilled in-house teams.”

This shift towards outcome-based engagement is likely to be one of the more important hiring trends of FY27. Where permanent headcount is constrained, organisations will still need access to the skills required to deliver critical programs, creating stronger demand for contractors, consultants and project-based delivery teams, particularly in specialist areas where internal capability is limited.

Steve also notes that without an appetite to review permanent salary bandings in some areas of government, agencies may struggle to secure the expertise they need through traditional permanent hiring pathways. The result is a market where the demand exists, but the engagement model may change.

Election uncertainty will influence government hiring decisions

In New South Wales, the March 2027 state election will add another layer of complexity to government hiring and workforce planning, particularly around how it will influence agencies to think about contingent labour, procurement and delivery models.

“It will be interesting to watch how policies evolve,” says Steve. “Including the government’s current view of contingent labour hire.”

For hiring teams, this means scrutiny around contractor spend may continue early in the new financial year, but as delivery pressure increases, agencies may need to reassess how they access specialist talent, particularly for cyber, AI, governance, cloud transition and digital service delivery.

Joseph Petrovski, Account Director at Talent Melbourne, expects similar pressure shaping the Victorian market:

“Government demand won’t disappear in FY27, but the way that talent is engaged is likely to change. With headcount pressure increasing, we expect to see more reliance on contractors, consultants and project-based delivery models.”

Cyber security, governance and risk will be priority hiring areas

Cyber security is expected to remain one of the strongest areas of demand in FY27.

In NSW, Steve points to the NSW Cyber Security Strategy and related policy direction as a major driver of future hiring. The NSW Government has already mandated targeted cyber uplift for agencies, including compliance against key requirements in the NSW Cyber Security Policy and greater visibility over key risks and critical assets.

This focus is expected to increase demand for:

• Cyber architects
• Cyber security analysts
• Cloud security engineers
• IAM specialists
• Critical infrastructure security experts

And as Steve notes:

“Because there is a shortage in this space, and limited appetite to source globally, we expect to see more investment in home-grown and junior cyber talent to build capability onshore.”

For employers, the cyber skills shortage won’t be solved through senior hiring alone and deliberately investing in junior pathways, training, internal mobility and long-term capability building is becoming critical for organisations.

For candidates, cyber will remain one of the strongest areas of opportunity, particularly for professionals who can pair technical knowledge with governance, risk, assurance and stakeholder communication.

Joseph is seeing a similar pattern in Victoria, where school compliance changes and heightened security across the education sector are expected to drive demand for cyber security, governance, risk and compliance capability.

Across government, education, financial services, critical infrastructure and essential services, cyber will remain closely linked to trust, resilience and regulatory confidence.

Defence will continue to drive specialist demand in Adelaide

In South Australia, defence is expected to remain one of the clearest drivers of economic and employment growth through FY27.

Vimal Venugopal, Senior Account Executive at Talent Adelaide, explains:

“Demand for engineering and technical talent remains high. And employers are prioritising quality and capability, with greater emphasis on candidates whose skills and experience closely match the role requirements.”

As a result, the Adelaide market is becoming more selective, with employers looking for more specialised experience, such as: Project Managers with infrastructure backgrounds, Automation Testers who have built automation frameworks from scratch, and Business Analysts with Microsoft 365 experience.

For candidates, this means general experience may no longer be enough as employers increasingly look for evidence of direct, relevant delivery experience and the ability to add value quickly.

Vimal is also seeing AI capability become more important outside traditional technology teams, reinforcing one of the bigger FY27 hiring themes nationally: AI literacy becoming a broader workforce capability.

WA demand is being driven by resources, energy and critical infrastructure

In Western Australia, mining, resources, energy, utilities and critical infrastructure continue to shape hiring demand.

Edwin Foo, Principal Account Manager at Talent Perth, says:

“Traditional operations in WA, particularly iron ore and gold, are still fuelling hiring, while expansion into wind, solar and grid integration is increasing the need for critical infrastructure capability.”

Demand remains strong across technology and engineering, particularly for:

• Automation Engineers across IT/OT
• Data Science and AI Platform Engineers
• Full-Stack Software Engineers
• AWS and Azure Cloud Architects
• Cyber Security Specialists

Workforce planning is also maturing as major infrastructure and energy transition programs continue. Edwin explains:

“Large-scale infrastructure and energy transition projects are shifting workforce planning from reactive, short-term recruitment cycles into more strategic, long-term models. With major mining, resources and state government project investments running in parallel, organisations are having to rethink how they plan future workforces.”

Unlike some markets where remote capability is a stronger lever, Perth is seeing clear demand for local talent.

Hybrid office mandates combined with the integrated nature of IT/OT across mining, resources and energy mean employers are prioritising candidates who can physically work and collaborate in Perth CBD offices and local operations centres.

AI demand will become more practical and governance-led

FY27 is likely to be the year AI hiring becomes less theoretical.

In financial services, Elliott Howard, Account Director at Talent Sydney, shares:

“A key trend will be the continued rise of Agentic AI as large enterprises move from proofs of concept to deploying autonomous systems that reduce manual effort and give employees more time to focus on critical thinking and problem solving.”

This will change role requirements as AI literacy becomes an essential skill, not just a technical specialisation.

However, in government, Steve expects AI demand to take a slightly different shape:

“Government wants to implement AI at scale, but the demand we expect to see is less about experimental AI engineering and more about practical adoption, governance and assurance.”

For employers, this means AI capability can no longer sit only with technical teams but must be embedded across governance, product, delivery, risk, data and operational teams.

For candidates, the opportunity lies in AI literacy, responsible AI understanding and the ability to apply AI to real workflows that will become increasingly valuable.

Cloud transition and shared platforms will continue to create demand

Cloud transformation is expected to remain a major driver of hiring in the next financial year, particularly across government and enterprise environments managing legacy infrastructure.

As Steve puts it:

“Cloud transitions will continue across NSW Government, particularly where agencies are looking to reduce duplication and move towards shared platforms. The opportunity isn’t solely about migrating infrastructure but improving service delivery, strengthening security, improving access to data and creating more efficient ways of working.”

This is expected to support demand for:

• Azure specialists
• AWS professionals
• Enterprise architects
• Integration architects

“Cloud is no longer just an infrastructure program,” says Steve. “The people who will be most valuable are those who understand technical implementation alongside governance, interoperability, service outcomes and how to reduce duplication across complex environments.”

Business Analysts will remain critical to digital service delivery

While emerging technologies often dominate the market conversation, Steve expects Business Analysts to remain in steady demand through FY27 simply because: digital strategy still needs translation.

Government agencies are under pressure to improve service delivery and citizen experience, and that requires people who can turn policy into products, requirements into delivery plans and stakeholder needs into practical digital services.

This is a reminder that the strongest transformation teams will need BAs, product specialists, delivery leads, change professionals and architects who can connect strategy to execution.

Financial services hiring will focus on risk, data and cyber

In Sydney’s financial services market, Elliott expects hiring to concentrate around risk, data and cyber security as the sector continues to face pressure from regulatory obligations, security threats, customer expectations and productivity demands. And as AI adoption increases, these priorities will become even more connected.

Organisations will need professionals who can unlock greater value from data, govern emerging technologies responsibly, strengthen cyber resilience and improve operational efficiency.

This is expected to support demand for:

• Risk professionals
• Data specialists
• Cyber security experts
• Governance professionals
• AI-literate business leaders
• Transformation specialists who understand regulated environments

For candidates, commercial judgement will matter as employers look for people who can do more than perform a technical function. They’ll want talent that understands risk, business value and the operating realities of financial services.

Software engineering demand is being reshaped by AI

AI is both creating and changing existing demand in the software engineering space.

Joseph explains:

“AI-augmented coding is changing the shape of software engineering demand. We’re seeing less emphasis on traditional front-end development and more demand for people who understand LLMs, AI-enabled productivity and how to apply these tools effectively.”

The expectations of a software engineer are shifting, and employers are likely to value engineers who can use AI tools to improve productivity, solve more complex problems, understand system architecture and apply strong judgement to AI-generated code.

For developers, FY27 will be a market that rewards adaptability. Narrow execution-based skill sets may become more vulnerable, while engineers who combine fundamentals with AI fluency, architecture thinking, and business understanding will be better placed.

Melbourne is likely to see selective recovery

In Melbourne, Joelle expects FY27 to bring renewed momentum across IT and technology-aligned hiring:

“As the dust settles on a tumultuous FY26, we are likely to see a renewed level of momentum in the Melbourne and broader Australian hiring market through FY27, although not at the intensity seen during the post-pandemic peak.”

Population growth, continued enterprise and government investment, and demand across essential services are expected to support a gradual improvement in confidence.

Strongest demand will likely sit across:

• AI adoption
• Cyber security uplift
• Cloud and data transformation
• Digital modernisation
• Essential services

Aligning with Joseph’s predictions that energy and critical infrastructure will continue to generate demand, particularly as organisations invest in resilience, modernisation and long-term delivery capability.

For high-impact technology roles connected to transformation, cyber, data and essential services, competition is expected to remain strong in the Melbourne market.

What FY27 means for employers

Workforce planning needs to be sharper, and organisations need to be clear about the capabilities they need, the value those capabilities create and the best way to access them.

This means permanent hiring in some areas, contract or consulting engagement in others, and more deliberate investment in early-career or home-grown talent where shortages are structural.

What FY27 means for candidates

For jobseekers, FY27 will reward relevance. Employers are increasingly looking for people who can demonstrate how their skills contribute to business outcomes, whether through improving productivity, managing risk, supporting transformation or delivering better services.

The strongest candidates will be those who combine technical capability with adaptability, commercial awareness and direct experience in their field. As AI continues to reshape the workplace, professionals who embrace new tools and can apply them effectively alongside their core expertise will be best positioned to take advantage of emerging opportunities.

The bottom line

FY27 will be a selective and capability-led market.

Cost scrutiny and procurement pressure will remain, and permanent headcount will still be carefully managed in some sectors, but the need for specialist talent is not going away.

The employers that succeed will be those that move from short-term cost control to long-term capability planning, and the candidates who stand out will be those who can show not only what they know, but how that knowledge creates value.

As Steve puts it, “The conversation has to move from cost to value.”

That may be the defining workforce shift of FY27.

The hiring market may be stabilising in parts of the economy, but for young people trying to enter the workforce, it feels anything but steady.

Entry-level opportunities are shrinking, graduate programs are scaling down, and confidence is fragile.

Talent placement data has shown entry-level hiring has dropped by 19% compared to two years ago and on the ground, that decline is palpable.

“With unemployment in New Zealand at its highest level in years, it’s hard not to lose confidence,” says Shanelle Partridge, Youth Program Manager at our social enterprise Rise by Talent. “There just aren’t many entry-level roles being advertised. For rangatahi, it’s really hard to navigate right now.”

And the challenge isn’t limited to any particular demographic. It spans school leavers, graduates, and young people coming through skills-based programs.

“It’s hard for everybody at the moment,” Shanelle explains. “But it’s especially hard for diverse communities where that door wasn’t fully open before and it’s certainly not wider now.”

Is the first rung disappearing?

For decades, entry-level roles acted as the first rung of the career ladder. It was a time and space to learn, experiment, and build capability.

And today? That rung is thinning.

A combination of tight budgets, cautious hiring and AI-driven productivity gains has changed how organisations think about junior roles. Many are prioritising experienced hires who can “hit the ground running” rather than investing in capability building.

“There’s a shift happening,” Shanelle says. “We’re seeing grad programs being cut back, and more emphasis on skills-based hiring over formal qualifications. It’s not just about having a degree anymore. Employers are asking: can you think critically? Are you curious? Can you solve everyday business problems?”

That shift isn’t necessarily negative. But it does raise a bigger question: what happens when organisations expect “next-level” capability without creating the pathway to get there?

AI: Opportunity and anxiety

AI is definitely part of this conversation but not exactly in the ways the headlines suggest.

Young people are, in many cases, ahead of the curve on the tech front.

“Rangatahi are already AI-literate,” Shanelle says. “They’re using it to plan workflows, build bots, create presentations, tell their story. They’re not scared of it.”

In Rise programs, storytelling exercises often involve AI tools from day two.

“They’re experimenting confidently — often before organisations have even rolled out AI literacy internally.”

But literacy doesn’t automatically mean discernment.

“There’s still a huge education piece needed,” Shanelle adds. “Young people might recognise AI content quickly, but do they always apply a critical lens? That’s something we still need to build.”

And there’s a deeper layer for Māori and Pasifika communities.

“There’s fear around what AI means for our communities and entry-level roles. We’re slower to get AI literacy into those spaces and that’s something we need to address.”

The pressure to be “job-ready”

One of the most significant shifts in the early-career landscape is employer selectivity in a candidate-saturated market.

“With some job postings attracting 1,000 applications in a few days, organisations can be extremely picky,” Shanelle explains. “If you’re not one of the first CVs through the door, it’s hard to even get seen.”

High application volumes don’t necessarily translate to better opportunity either. Instead, they’re raising the bar for what “entry-level” means.

Organisations are asking for:

• Immediate contribution
• Strong interpersonal capability
• Commercial awareness
• Confidence and initiative

All without necessarily investing in structured development.

And for rangatahi Māori and Pasifika, additional pressures compound the challenge.

“Family is central,” Shanelle says. “If young people need to contribute to rent, mortgage or bills at home, they’ll take any job they can get. Tech might not feel accessible straight away if the door isn’t clearly open.”

That tension between economic necessity and long-term career aspiration is felt within these communities.

Why cutting entry-level roles is short-sighted

In our latest salary guide, we highlight a growing gap where short-term cost discipline risks long-term talent shortages.

This early-career squeeze is a clear example.

“If we don’t create those pathways now, who manages the business later?” Shanelle asks. “We need young people in the system so we can future-proof leadership.”

The solution doesn’t have to be large-scale graduate programs. In fact, in a tighter market, more agile approaches may be more effective.

“We’re seeing organisations rethink what entry-level looks like,” she says. “Project-based roles. Breaking down tasks within existing roles. Asking: is there something here that a junior person could own?”

Some Auckland-based employers are now reviewing every vacancy and asking a simple question:

“Is there any part of this role that could be carved out for entry-level talent?”

If yes, they create space for it with intention and to proactively future-proof their workforces.

So, what can businesses do now?

Practical starting points include:

• Identifying project-based entry opportunities
• Earmarking a small number of roles each year for junior talent
• Partnering with organisations like Rise to align training with industry need
• Reviewing roles to carve out structured development tasks

“We created Rise to bridge that lag between what industry needs and what education delivers,” Shanelle says. “Tech changes fast. Waiting three or four years for a pipeline to come through uni doesn’t work anymore.”

And bridging that gap responsibly is now critical.

The long game

The early-career squeeze isn’t just an issue isolated to just young people trying to get their foot in the door. It’s now a workforce strategy issue.

When organisations reduce entry-level intake, they may ease short-term cost pressure but they also narrow their future leadership funnel.

And when the market tightens again — as history suggests it will — that pipeline gap becomes expensive.

Young people aren’t lacking ambition or adaptability. In many cases, they’re more technologically fluent and agile than the environments they’re trying to enter.

The question now is whether businesses are willing to meet them halfway.

Explore how capability gaps are reshaping hiring in our More than Money Salary Guide, including insights into early-career trends and long-term workforce planning.

If the last few years were about building, 2026 is about selling.

The Digital hiring market across the US has regained momentum, but venture-backed businesses are no longer hiring on ambition alone. Consultancies aren’t scaling delivery teams ahead of demand, and every hire is being measured against revenue impact and time-to-value.

As Jason Pho, Director of Technology Recruitment in our New York team, puts it:

“After a slow 2024, we saw an uptick in 2025 and it’s been trending up since then. The market feels more stable now. There are still good local candidates looking, and there’s opportunity out there. You just need to filter through the noise.”

Revenue first: GTM and sales demand accelerates

Over the past couple years, funding was being poured into product development, scaling engineering teams, and expanding roadmaps.

Now, the pressure has shifted downstream.

“In the startup space, the last few years were about building and now it’s about selling,” says Jason.

Go-to-market and sales hiring has become one of the most active areas in the Digital ecosystem and, beyond growth, companies are fighting for clear differentiation in a saturated AI market.

“There are so many new AI tools now that a lot of companies are honestly confused about how they get real ROI from them,” Jason explains. “You can roll out a new tool, but if you don’t change the process around it, it just creates more noise.”

This is where proven sales professionals with a track record of new business development, complex deal cycles and pipeline generation are in high demand across startups and consulting firms alike.

And we’ve found that smaller boutiques are also benefiting in this market.

“Smaller firms can compete with the Big Four now,” Jason has observed. “Tech is cheaper, delivery can be faster, and clients want more flexibility and customized solutions instead of ‘this is how we do it’.”

In today’s market, agility is an edge.

AI hiring: proof over potential

If the last two years were about experimentation, 2026 is where it gets real.

“Companies are moving past ‘AI in theory’ and pushing for proof you’ve actually done it,” says Jason. “Where have you implemented something? What changed? What was the net positive outcome?”

The interview questions are sharper:

• What went live?
• What improved?
• What was the measurable business impact?

“A lot of candidates get unstuck because they’re still speaking in hypotheticals and proof-of-concepts rather than outcomes.”

At the same time, AI has complicated the hiring process for both sides.

Jason explains:

“AI-written resumes, AI screening tools, automated outreach. It can actually make it harder to identify genuinely strong candidates. I think the big differentiator in the hiring process is still communication; how candidates are treated and the human interaction. People ultimately remember how the process felt.”

In-house capability is rising

Another defining trend in 2026, not just limited to the Digital space, is the shift towards internal capability building.

“It’s about price and control,” says Jason. “The consulting market is crowded and competitive but, more than that, a lot of organizations want the IP and capability in-house.”

Especially in traditional sectors like manufacturing and government, more end-user organizations are building internal Digital teams rather than outsourcing entirely.

As a result, permanent hiring has become the preferred route for core AI and platform capability, while contract demand is more selective and often tied to defined programs of work rather than open-ended transformation mandates.

“People don’t see full-time as ‘stable for life’ the way they used to,” Jason shares. “And employers still like the flexibility contractors bring.”

True career contractors remain outcome-driven: enter, deliver, exit, repeat. While employers are being more deliberate about where they lock in long-term capability versus where they flex.

Compensation has also largely stabilized year-on-year as the market becomes more predictable and employer-leaning. But proven, revenue-aligned talent will continue to command a premium, particularly those with real AI implementation experience.

Engineering for outcomes, not output

AI has also reshaped workforce design with some startups asking: can we hire fewer AI-enabled engineers rather than scaling traditional dev teams?

But Jason warns that speed without alignment is risky:

“Before, you needed a team decision on what to build. Now, anyone can spin something up quickly. But is this what the business actually needs? Does it fit the product? The strong engineering candidates in today’s market are the ones who can decisively say: here’s what the business needs, here’s what we should build, and here’s the return we’ll get.”

In other words, leverage and the need for judgement has increased.

More than just technical capability, expectations also include commercial awareness, product alignment, and the ability to collaborate effectively across stakeholders. As build cycles accelerate, decision-making quality becomes the real differentiator.

And that’s where environment starts to matter.

High-performing teams don’t just rely on individual outputs, they rely on shared context, fast feedback loops, and strong communication. In an AI-enabled world, how teams work together is becoming just as important as what they build.

The 2026 reality

Growth has returned, funding is flowing more steadily, and consulting pipelines are strengthening. However, unlike previous cycles, hiring is being driven by outcomes rather than ambition alone.

AI has accelerated build cycles and expanded what small teams can achieve, but it’s also raised the bar. Candidates are expected to prove production impact, engineering leaders are prioritizing alignment, and commercial teams are being hired to convert innovation into revenue.

At the same time, workforce design is becoming more intentional. Organizations are deciding where to lock in long-term capability, where to flex with contractors, and how to structure teams around performance rather than headcount.

In 2026, the market is sharper and the organizations that win will the be the ones that hire with clarity.

Explore the latest AI and Digital permanent salary and contract rate benchmarks in our More Than Money Salary Guide to ensure your hiring strategy is aligned with today’s market realities.

In 2026, the Microsoft hiring market has become sharper.

Last year, we reported a surge in demand across Microsoft Biz Apps, Cloud and Data as organizations reignited delayed transformation projects and this year feels like another step-change.

As Dylan Cohen, Director of Microsoft & Cloud Solutions in our New York team, puts it:

“AI’s now at the point where companies are putting it into production, not just experimenting or piloting it.”

This production versus proof-of-concept distinction is what’s defining the market this year.

From experimenting to real-world results

Twelve months ago, many organizations were still experimenting by testing and running pilot; giving users access to tools like Copilot, Claude and ChatGPT. Consultancies and Product companies were offering a taste of AI, demonstrating different use cases and offering proof of concepts, and as soon as those 2-8-week engagements would end, many companies found themselves stalling from taking the next step.

Now, the conversations are different, and AI hiring has matured quickly.

“The thing that’s changed is moving away from companies solely looking at user adoption with AI, to hiring AI Architects who’ve actually put AI into production,” Dylan explains. “Clients want to speak to candidates who’ve delivered end-to-end, full life cycle AI projects.”

The key questions in interviews today are:

• Did it go into production and is the company using it today How so?
• What was your role in delivery?
• Was it proof of concept or live deployment?
• How is the business benefiting?

“What we’re uncovering is there’s a lot of proof of concepts, but limited real-world experience in actual production and outcomes,” says Dylan. “Candidates who’ve deployed AI in production should be screaming from the rooftops about it. They’re a small subset compared to the rest.”

AI spend: readiness vs build

With a better understanding of what’s capable with AI between now and this time last year, companies have a more focused strategy with their AI hiring.

According to Dylan:

 “The strongest clients are starting with getting their foundations right: data cleansing, governance and clear alignment on the end goal before they ‘go crazy with AI’. The big change versus this time last year is confidence. Now they understand what they need to do and they’re putting real roadmaps and project plans behind it.”

Across consulting, the era of endless pilots is fading fast.

“Proofs of concept were the story of last year,” he says. “This year, companies are confirming budget, agreeing on business value and moving from prototypes into production.”

Financial services, insurance and healthcare are industries leading the charge, and product-led firms are attracting private equity on the back of real and tangible AI deployment.

D365 demand: Copilot changes what “good” looks like

Hiring demand across Dynamics 365 remains strong.

“All three areas, F&O, Business Central and CRM, are busy,” says Dylan. “Enterprise budgets have reset and we’re seeing clear uptick in F&O alongside continued strength in CRM.”

But Copilot is what’s raised the baseline.

“It’s no longer enough to simply know Power Platform,” he explains. “Now the expectation is: can you build Copilot-ready workflows? Do you understand AI agents? Can you speak to readiness and use cases in a practical way?”

CRM in particular has seen one of the biggest shifts:

“Functional and technical CRM consultants are expected to understand Copilot readiness and how AI fits into the solution. That doesn’t mean deep AI engineering expertise, but the need to be able to speak to it with confidence.”

And the candidates who stand out are the ones who proactively prove it.

“We’ve seen candidates who go out of their way to demo what they’ve built with Copilot in interviews. And nearly every candidate who’s brought something tangible into an interview has landed the role.”

Permanent vs contractor shifts

Last year, companies were racing to secure contractors for AI-specific initiatives and this year, the hiring trends have shifted.

“In the Microsoft space, especially within consultancies and product companies, the bias toward permanent hiring is stronger,” says Dylan. “If they find someone strong, they want to lock that capability in long term.”

Talent who can genuinely deliver are being treated as a strategic hire for businesses.

End users are more mixed; often leaning on consulting partners for roadmap and production delivery, then supplementing with embedded contractors for validation or oversight.

And interestingly, career contractors are even adapting to this demand.

According to Dylan:

“Some high-end contractors are saying they’d move to permanent if it’s the right company. Meaning that strong product ambition, smart teams, and real ownership are becoming important factors to these candidates.”

All signs are pointing to a hiring market that finds value in long-term retention of high-value capability, not just in the AI space.

Decisive hiring wins and hybrid still wins

The best leaders are focused on building world-class teams.

In an employer-driven hiring market, many organizations are holding out for the mythical 100% fit. But in a limited candidate pool where delivery experience is scarce and time-to-value is increasingly important, this strategy can backfire.

“I recommend that 80% fit,” says Dylan. “The last 20% can be trained but while you wait, your team and business are suffering. If you’re sitting on the fence trying to find that perfect candidate, reflect on: How long has the role been open? How many candidates have you actually vetted? If you’ve spoken to 20 aligned candidates and still can’t decide, you’re either not ready to hire or you’re being too selective.”

Whether it’s hiring for a sales, consulting, or engineering role, the strongest employers are defining outcomes early, aligned on success criteria, and move quickly once they find the right candidate.

Strategic working models are also playing a significant part in candidate decisiveness. Despite high-profile return-to-office pushes in recent years, hybrid continues to win in the Microsoft ecosystem.

“Five days onsite still hurts attraction,” Dylan notes. “Hybrid just keeps working.”

The firms insisting on full-time onsite, particularly in non-metro areas, are shrinking their talent pools unnecessarily.

In short: the organizations winning in 2026 are clear on outcomes, realistic on profile expectations, and flexible enough to attract the talent capable of delivering.

What’s next: the end of time-and-materials?

Looking ahead, there are murmurs of another structural shift emerging.

Dylan explains:

“This time next year, we’ll be talking about how consulting firms moved away from time-and-materials and toward deliverables and outcomes.”

With AI accelerating build cycles, traditional 2,000-hour project models are under pressure and effort becomes less sellable than the project’s impact.

“If AI is doing what used to take weeks of programming time, companies still provide value. But how do they monetize that in an outcome-based model?”

The 2026 reality

The AI hype of previous years has given way to maturity for the Microsoft hiring market.

AI is no longer a slide in a strategy deck or an experiment run by an innovation team. It’s embedded into delivery roadmaps, tied to budgets, and increasingly measured against real business outcomes.

And that shift is raising the bar.

Candidates are being asked to prove production impact over theoretical exposure, consultancies are being pushed to demonstrate end-to-end capability, and organizations are evaluating partners on governance, adoption, and time-to-value rather than technical ambition.

At the same time, hiring strategies are becoming more disciplined. Companies are locking in long-term AI capability where it matters most, reassessing workforce structures, and aligning roles directly to measurable outcomes.

For leaders shaping their Microsoft workforce strategy: prioritize production experience, move decisively, and build teams that can both design and deliver real impact.

Explore the latest Microsoft, Dynamics 365 and AI salary and rate benchmarks in our More Than Money Salary Guide 2026.

AI is already in the hiring room

AI is no longer knocking on the door of recruitment, it’s already inside.

From CV screening and sourcing to scheduling interviews and analysing candidate data, AI now touches huge parts of the hiring process. And while plenty of organisations are leaning in, others are quietly uneasy. The real question isn’t whether AI belongs in recruitment anymore. It’s how far should it go, and where do humans need to step back in?

To unpack the dilemma, we put it to our experts. Jack Jorgensen, General Manager – Data, AI & Innovation at Avec  argues the case for AI as a powerful enabler, while Georgia Hynes, Senior Talent Partner at Talent Wellington takes the opposing view, cautioning leaders against over-automation in a human-led profession.

Here’s where they landed.

The case for AI: smarter shortlists, less burnout

Jack’s position is clear: AI shouldn’t replace recruiters, but ignoring it would be a mistake.

“AI is already being used by candidates,” he explains. “If you don’t use it, you’re putting yourself at a disadvantage.”

From a candidate perspective, Jack sees real value. Many capable professionals struggle to articulate their experience and write a strong CV, especially those with non-linear career paths.

“There are people who can do the work but can’t sell themselves, AI helps level that playing field.” He says.

On the recruiter side, Jack argues AI can significantly reduce manual workload, particularly in high-volume markets.

“If you’ve got 200 applicants for a role, going through every CV isn’t a human experience either, AI can help surface the top 30% so recruiters can spend their time where it matters, qualifying properly.”

He also challenges the idea that AI creates dishonesty.

“People have lied on CVs for years. That problem didn’t start with AI, it just evolved.”

Used correctly, Jack sees AI as an enabler in supporting better recruitment, not making the final call.

The case against AI: recruitment is still human work

Georgia agrees AI has its place, but draws a firm line when it comes to decision-making.

“My job as a recruiter is knowing who will work out in a role and who won’t, that’s not something a machine can do.” she says.

From a client perspective, her biggest concern is over-reliance. When every CV looks polished (because AI helped write it), it becomes harder to spot what actually matters: a. can this candidate really do what their CV says they can do b. transferable skills, context, the ‘why’ behind a career move and the nuances that experienced recruiters see instantly.

“Humans can read between the lines. AI filters based on keywords. That’s where great candidates get lost.”

She’s also sceptical that AI can replace intuition, one of the most valuable tools an experienced recruiter has. “I can hear uncertainty in someone’s voice. I can hear when something’s off, even over the phone. AI doesn’t have intuition. It never will.” she explains.

Georgia also raises the risk of bias at scale. “AI learns from historical data. If past hiring was biased, you’re just repeating it at scale.”

And when it comes to video-based AI assessments?

“Honestly, abhorrent,” Jack adds. “Trying to simulate recruiter judgement through facial cues and voice analytics is a terrible experience for everyone.”

Georgia agrees “We’re not recruiting robots. Humans should not be filtered out by machines.”

The verdict: a mixture of both

Ultimately, this debate doesn’t land with a simple “yes” or “no”.

AI isn’t breaking recruitment, but misusing it can.

Used well, AI can help reduce recruiter burnout, improve focus, and help teams move faster through the early stages of screening. Used poorly, it strips nuances, amplifies bias, and filters out great people.

For leaders, the takeaway is clear: AI should support recruiters, not replace them. And human judgement must remain at the centre of every hiring decision.

The future of recruitment isn’t human or AI. It’s human with AI, used carefully, intentionally, and with experience leading the way.

It’s a decision almost everyone wrestles with at least once: do you chase the bigger pay cheque, or choose the company with a great culture?

For this month’s debate, two of our consultants go head-to-head on the question candidates ask us every week: What matters more – culture or compensation?

James Ardma, Senior Candidate Manager at Talent, argues for culture. Sophia Parrelli, Account Executive at Talent, argues for compensation. Here’s where they landed, and how you can use their advice in your next career move.

First things first, what do we mean by ‘culture’?  

“Compensation is the hook that gets you through the door. Culture is what makes you want to stay.” 

For James, culture is everything beyond your KPIs — how you’re developed, supported, and recognised. “It’s the relationship with your manager, the way people invest in you, and whether you can actually see a path forward,” he says. 

Sophia agrees culture is important but adds a caveat “It’s the work environment around you — support, flexibility, benefits. But it thrives only when you’re paid fairly.” 

Both also agree that culture can be incredibly subjective. What feels like an inspiring, collaborative workplace to one person might feel intense or overwhelming to another. Compensation, on the other hand, is factual and measurable – you can see the number, negotiate it, and benchmark it against the market. Culture? It’s about fit, chemistry, and how you personally define ‘good’. 

The case for culture: momentum over money 

James believes culture is the real differentiator when it comes to long-term fulfilment. He’s seen candidates take up to a 30–40% pay cut if it means joining a company that truly supports their growth and wellbeing, and if there’s a clear roadmap to progression. 

“People don’t leave for money; they leave when they stop seeing momentum,” he says. “When candidates hear a genuine six- or twelve-month development plan, they’re more engaged, and they stay longer.” 

Culture isn’t a ‘nice-to-have’. It’s a growth engine — and a strong one can cut attrition, increase engagement, and keep top performers from leaving. “The right environment compounds over time,” he adds. “That’s worth far more than a short-term pay bump.” 

The case for compensation: The foundation everything sits on

Sophia’s takes a more pragmatic view: life is expensive. Rising living costs, housing and childcare make pay non-negotiable. Financial stability isn’t just a motivator, it’s survival. 

“Great culture can’t pay your rent,” she explains. “70–80% of people I speak to are moving for better pay. And that’s okay.” 

To her, fair compensation isn’t separate from culture; it’s part of it. “When people see layoffs or pay freezes, it erodes trust. Transparent, consistent pay practices are culture. They show stability and respect.” 

In Sophia’s view, culture matters — but it’s not the lever that gets people through the door.  “You can have all the free coffees and wellness days you like, but if your salary doesn’t reflect your value, that culture will only take you so far.” 

Her advice? Be smart, not sentimental. “A company can have a fantastic culture and still go through redundancies six months later. Don’t just go on good vibes — do your research. That’s part of being a savvy job seeker today.” 

The verdict: it’s all about balance 

So, which one wins – culture or compensation? 

In reality, they’re inseparable. Compensation is the foundation; culture is the amplifier. One gives you stability, the other gives you staying power. 

The takeaway? Start with fair pay. Make sure you’re compensated in line with your skills and the market. Then, look deeper, how does the company invest in growth? What does success really look like there?  

“Whilst money gets you through the door, culture is what makes you want to stay.” Says Sophia. 

The final word 

When it comes to choosing between culture and compensation, there’s no universal right answer, but there is a smart one. 

Start with fair pay. Then look for the culture that helps you grow, learn, and stay inspired. Because money might win you the role, but culture is what makes you thrive in it. 

Next up: Stay tuned for Part 2, where James and Sophia return to debate the employer 

Perspective, what truly keeps people longer: a great culture or higher pay? 

If you’ve already accepted, should you go to another final interview?

It’s a situation many candidates find themselves in; you’ve verbally or even formally accepted a job offer, but another final interview opportunity lands on your lap. Do you honour the commitment you’ve already made, or explore what could be a better fit? It’s a tricky balance between integrity, opportunity, and self-interest. To unpack the dilemma, we asked two of our recruitment experts, Chris Hossell, Senior Consultant in Wellington, and Shweta Chopra, Practice Lead in Auckland, New Zealand, to each pick a side, present their perspectives then see how it unfolds.

The case against: Your word is your bond

Chris Hossell presented the case that once an offer has been accepted, you should not continue interviewing elsewhere.

He argues that integrity and professionalism are critical in these moments: “Once you sign a contract, you’ve given your word. To pull out after that leaves a sour taste for the employer and damages your reputation. Hiring managers don’t forget situations like this, and if you come across them again in the future, that decision will follow you. Even before you’ve signed, being transparent is key. If you do have another interview lined up, be open about it, it’s better to ask for an extension to make an informed decision than to backtrack after committing.”

Chris also points out the ripple effect beyond just one job. “The market is smaller than people think. Word gets around, especially in tight-knit industries. Backing out of an offer after acceptance doesn’t just affect your relationship with one employee, it could also affect how future employers or recruiters view your reliability. A short-term gain might not be worth the long-term damage.”

The case for: The need to protect yourself

Shweta Chopra presented the alternative view. She argues that candidates should keep their options open until the moment a contract is signed.

“Verbal offers don’t carry the same weight as signed agreements, and candidates need to protect themselves. Things can still fall through, and a verbal acceptance is a grey area. Until you’ve put pen to paper, you should have the choice to attend other interviews, especially if it could lead to a role that’s a stronger fit. What matters most is honesty: communicate with your recruiter and the employer so there are no surprises. Once you’ve signed, though, I agree that you need to stop. That’s the point at which commitment really kicks in.”

She also notes that candidates should put themselves first, because companies always will. “At the end of the day, organisations will do what’s best for them. They can withdraw offers at the last minute or restructure a role after you’ve joined. So, I don’t think candidates should feel guilty about exploring every option until they’ve locked something in formally. It’s about being pragmatic while still acting respectfully.”

Both Chris and Shweta agree that the challenge often lies in timing and communication. Sometimes delays in hiring processes create confusion, leaving candidates stuck between opportunities. In those cases, Shweta points out that the responsibility also falls on organisations to run efficient and transparent processes, so candidates aren’t forced into awkward last-minute choices.

The verdict: A mixture of both

Ultimately, this debate doesn’t land neatly on one side. As Chris stresses, integrity and honouring commitments are crucial to building trust. As Shweta highlights, candidates also need to protect their interests until they have certainty. The takeaway? Transparency is everything. If you’re in the grey area of a verbal offer, be upfront about other interviews. If you’ve signed, honor that commitment. Navigating these situations with honesty and integrity not only protects your career but ensures you build strong, lasting professional relationships.

TikTok has become an unlikely oracle of work culture, and the latest buzzwords have been doing the rounds: “job hugging” and “quiet cracking”. More than just social media gimmicks, they’re signals of where the labour market is right now in Australia, New Zealand, and the US.

What is “job hugging”?

A response to a tighter labour market, rising costs of living, and waves of layoffs across industries, job hugging is the latest phenomenon defined as employees holding onto their jobs for security, even if they’re disengaged.

On the surface, job hugging can look like stagnation, but employers are benefiting; fewer resignations mean lower recruitment costs and more certainty for long-term planning.

In Australia, job mobility has slipped from 9.5% in 2023 to just 7.7% in 2025, while SEEK reports job ads are down 4.8% year-on-year. It’s not surprising that many are clinging tightly to a role that feels safe.

What is “quiet cracking”?

“Quiet cracking” flips the script. It’s about employees pushing for growth in spite of limited upward mobility. This means side hustles, passion projects, or going the extra mile in their current role.

Another reaction to the broader reality, as Gallup reports 77% of people are globally disengaged at work. And when promotions or pay rises are thin on the ground, workers are finding ways to crack open new growth pathways on their own.

Gen Z and the broken entry-level market

Much of the conversation around job hugging overlaps with old narratives about Gen Zs “job hopping.” The youngest generation in the workforce, Gen Z carries a reputation for being quick to move on or staying for only 1-3 years before seeking something new.

But here’s what the headlines often miss: this isn’t about disloyalty. It’s survival in a systematically broken entry-level market.

According to Jobs and Skills Australia, entry-level jobs postings are down significantly. While in Australia, the unemployment rate is holding steady at 4.2%, the rate for young people – which is typically higher than the overall rate – has risen slightly to 9.5%.

At the same time, the pay-off for switching roles has largely evaporated. In 2023, job hoppers were gaining 7.7% salary increases compared to 5.5% for those who stayed. Now, job hoppers see a measly 0.2% gap in salary bumps of new roles offering 4.8% compared to 4.6% for those who stay put.

Candidates: Reframe the narrative

Instead of internalising this behaviour as flighty or fickle, rethink how you want to position yourself:

• Don’t apologise for being strategic. Job changes can be intentional career design. Rather than saying “I know it looks like a lot of moves,” frame it as “Each role was chosen to build specific skills for my long-term goals.”
• Skills growth over tenure. Loyalty is no longer measured in years. What matters is the growth, skills and capabilities you can point to.
• Make every move count. Random job hopping is over; strategic career construction is the new norm.

What these trends tell us about the market

Together, job hugging and quiet cracking reveal a workforce caught between caution and ambition:

• Risk aversion is high. Workers are reluctant to leave without a compelling reason.
• Retention is fragile. People may stay, but disengagement looms unless employers create pathways for growth.
• The talent pool is selective. Candidates want roles that feel both secure and has opportunity for growth, and they’ll pass on jobs that don’t offer either.

Employers: The takeaway for leaders

If you’re hiring in Australia, New Zealand, or the US, understand the balance employees are trying to strike: stability on one hand, and growth on the other. “Job huggers” need reassurance that your opportunity is safe. “Quiet crackers” need to see how it will help them grow.

In other words, you aren’t just selling a role, you’re selling everything that goes along with it: security, skills, growth, culture, and the list goes on.

Want to understand how these workforce signals could impact your hiring strategy? Our team can help you plan your next move. Get in touch.

In today’s job market, the first “reader” of your resume is usually software.

Applicant Tracking Systems (ATS) parse (read, break down, and map) your resume into structured data so recruiters can search, sort, and rank candidates fast. When the parsing goes wrong, strong applicants can get lost in the shuffle, and another caveat? Since job seekers are also using AI to game the system, we’re in a hiring landscape where both sides are optimising for efficiency, and the result is anything but.

What is parsing and why does it matter?

Parsing is how an ATS interprets your resume and turns it into searchable fields like name, job title, dates, skills, and education. If your resume formatting confuses the parser, your experience might not show up correctly in recruiter searches even if you’re highly qualified and fit for the role.

There are a few types of parsers out there:

• Keyword-based: Looks for common section headers and formats. Deviate too far and you might break it.
• AI/NLP-based: More advanced systems can extract skills and infer meaning from context but they aren’t perfect.
• OCR-based: Kicks in when resumes are uploaded as PDFs or images without a proper text layer. Accuracy here drops sharply.

For job seekers: Format for humans and machines

• Stick to 12pt fonts that every system recognises like Times New Roman, Calibri or Arial.
• Avoid design extras: Tables, columns, images, logos, and text boxes might look nice but can trip up parsing.
• Use clear section headers: Experience, Education, Certifications, Skills.
• Pack it with keywords: Think of your resume like SEO for job boards. Search “<your job> keywords” and use those in context and tie them to outcomes. Don’t list them in a block.
• Save and upload in .docx, not PDF. PDFs often require OCR to extract your text, and that’s where things break down.

As JP Browne, Practice Manager from Talent Auckland, explains:

“Some organisations are moving away from AI screening tools, because applicants can just copy-paste job ads into AI prompts and generate amazing cover letters. But if the CV doesn’t match the substance, it’s game over. Your resume has to actually contain the right data and not just sound impressive. I call it CV-for-dummies because I need everything spelled out. Don’t assume your title tells the story. Put in more detail, not less.”

For employers: Efficiency is not effectiveness

AI and ATS tools help filter thousands of applicants but over-relying on automation can hurt you. Especially in a market where candidates are leveraging generative AI to write polished CVs and cover letters, many hiring managers are finding that what looks good on paper doesn’t hold up in interview and that’s slowing the process down.

Instead of streamlining hiring, AI on both sides is creating a new bottleneck: CVs that look right but don’t deliver, and shortlists that fail to surface the best fit.

“It is not unusual for our team in Sydney to still receive 750–1500 applications per role,” says Matthew Munson, Managing Director of Talent Sydney. “Responding to this volume of applications is hard for agencies and employers and so the levels of candidate service is suffering, leading to a lot of frustration in market.”

This is echoed in South Australia by Vimal Venugopal, Senior Consultant in Technology & Project Services Recruitment in Talent Adelaide:

“Public sector jobs are seeing the highest number of applicants per job ad. According to SEEK, that index now sits at 220, and Professional Services roles are close behind at 187. That’s a huge amount of competition. This data is completely in line with what we’re observing in the Adelaide market. For example, we listed a Data Migration Analyst role and an ICT Support Analyst role and received 299 and 342 applications respectively.”

Keep a human in the loop

ATS tools are useful but they can’t replace human judgement. We recommend keeping a hiring professional involved in reviewing any final shortlist. Take a second look at ‘near miss’ candidates whose resumes may not have been perfectly formatted but show potential and revisit your role briefs and consider re-advertising with clarified requirements or alternate job titles. Most importantly, ensure interviews are being used to assess capability, not just alignment to the AI-generated CV.

Final tips for both sides

Job seekers: Format simply, write clearly, and tailor your resume for the role without ChatGPT doing all the heavy lifting.

Employers: Review your ATS setting, make sure your job ads are written clearly (without keyword stuffing), and don’t delegate shortlisting entirely to automation. The right candidate may be hiding just behind the algorithm.

If you’re a job seeker looking for your next exciting opportunity, head to our jobs board. And if you’re a hiring manager looking to find top talent who can hit the ground running, get in touch today.

In a hiring market that feels tougher by the day, speed is everything. But when agencies cut corners in the name of speed, everyone loses.

Thomas Mackenzie, Account Director from our Sydney headquarters, has noticed a new trend:

“There are agencies submitting candidates to clients without ever meeting or speaking to those candidates first. They’re submitting personal details including full name, email, phone and other details they’ve gathered by scraping tools or from previously shared CVs, all without the candidate’s consent.”

On the surface, it looks efficient: more CVs, faster. But here’s the reality:

• Privacy risk – Sharing candidate details without consent runs against the spirit of the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth).
• Ethical breach – Members of the RCSA and APSCo are bound by codes of conduct requiring candidate consent and breaches can trigger investigations and penalties.
• Poor outcomes – When candidates don’t know they’ve been submitted, dropouts and rejections are inevitable, and that wastes everyone’s time.
• Brand damage – To candidates and clients alike, it looks impersonal and rushed. Trust takes years to build and seconds to lose.

Kara Smith, New Zealand Country Manager, has seen the impact firsthand:

“Just this week, another organisation sent a candidate’s CV for a role. We had fully interviewed the candidate, taken a reference check upfront, provided a full summary of the candidate’s fit and motivation and got the candidate’s explicit consent. Guess what? The candidate’s not being interviewed at all now. Is the fact that two agencies submitted the candidate part of the reason why? Could be. It’s just not good enough.”

And Matthew Munson, Managing Director of Talent in Sydney, adds an important reminder:

“Recruitment is, and always will be, a human job. Technology and AI can help us move faster, but it can’t replace the trust the comes from people speaking to people. A CV on its own isn’t enough. What matters is understanding the person behind it.”

As a hiring manager, it’s worth asking: Do you really want CVs at speed, or do you want to know the candidates you’re meeting are engaged, motivated, and have chosen to be there?

And as a candidate, it’s worth reflecting too: Do you really want your CV being flung across the market without your consent? Or would you rather work with a recruiter who takes the time to strategically position your profile and advocate for you with the hiring manager? A good recruiter will prepare you for interviews, share insights about the company, coach you on what matters to decision-makers, negotiate salary, title and terms on your behalf, and ultimately enhance your visibility and network in your market.

For us, placing contractors doesn’t end with the placement. We support our contractor community throughout their engagement, from wellbeing and education around financial management, to our one-stop contractor portal, ENGAGE, networking events, and other employee benefits they might otherwise miss out on. At any stage of the hiring journey, when candidates and contractors feel supported and valued, they bring more energy and commitment to your organisation.

Recruitment is about the people just as much as it is about the process, and when privacy, trust, and candidate experience are protected, outcomes are stronger for everyone.

If you’re looking for a recruitment partner who puts people and process on equal footing, let’s talk about how we can help you.