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.

AI has become part of the working day. The challenge now is ensuring AI is helping organisations achieve the outcomes that matter most.

Join Talent Auckland‘s JP Browne in conversation with experts Emily Zhang, Director of The HumAIn Impact, and Jack Jorgensen, General Manager – Data, AI & Innovation at Avec, as they unpack the findings from our recent survey of 1,505 business leaders and technology professionals across Australia and New Zealand.

Using the findings as a starting point, they’ll explore how organisations are moving beyond AI adoption, why usage alone doesn’t prove value, and what leaders should focus on to make AI part of meaningful business improvement.

Session information

Date: Thursday 17 September
Time: 1:00pm AEST
Format: Online webinar

Register now

What we’ll explore

In this webinar, we’ll discuss:

• How AI adoption has shifted to implementation over the past 12 months
• Why organisations should stop measuring AI usage and start measuring the business outcomes that matter
• What the survey reveals about governance, human judgement and responsible AI adoption
• Why AI has become a leadership, workforce and operating model challenge
• Practical actions organisations can take to embed AI in ways that improve speed, quality, customer outcomes and business performance

Whether you’re leading a business, technology function, people strategy or transformation program, you’ll leave with practical insights into how organisations can move from AI use to meaningful business impact.

Register now

Speakers

Jack Jorgensen

General Manager – Data, AI & Innovation, Avec

Jack Jorgensen is a seasoned technology leader with more than a decade of experience developing bespoke, complex software solutions. He brings deep technical expertise across data analytics, software development, system integration, DevOps, cyber security and infrastructure. Actively engaged in the open-source community, Jack is known for his pragmatic approach and clear communication style.

Emily Zhang

Director, The HumAIn Impact

Emily Zhang has spent 15+ years helping organisations navigate one of the hardest parts of transformation: people. From large-scale AI and digital programmes at KPMG, to workforce redesign at CBA, Westpac and APA Group, and building people capability from scratch in high-growth startups, Emily brings deep experience leading transformation and change at every stage and scale.

JP Browne

Practice Manager, Talent Auckland

JP Browne is based in Talent’s Auckland office and brings 20+ years of recruitment experience, specialising in resourcing for large-scale projects and niche skillsets. As host, JP will guide the discussion through the lens of workforce planning, hiring and the skills organisations need as AI becomes part of the working day.

Register now

The workplace debate around AI has spent a lot of time focused on one question: will it replace jobs?

While it’s understandable, it’s increasingly not the most useful question to ask. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman recently acknowledged that fewer entry-level white-collar jobs have been eliminated than he expected and said he no longer anticipates the kind of immediate “jobs apocalypse” some have predicted. In Australia, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has similarly argued that the goal should be for AI to support and create good jobs, rather than simply replace them.

Neither view means workforce disruption is off the table. Roles will change, some forms of work will decline, and new capabilities will be required. But they reinforce an important distinction: AI can have a significant effect on employment without replacing entire jobs at once.

Our own research points in a similar direction. Job security was named as the biggest concern by just 7% of respondents, down from 25% in 2025. Meanwhile, upskilling existing employees is the most common workforce response to AI, ahead of redesigning roles or workflows and changing the skills organisations hire for.

The change is already happening inside jobs. Nearly half of the 1,505 business leaders and technology professionals surveyed for our latest research use AI daily, while 71% use it at least a few times a week. What was recently treated as an emerging workplace technology is quickly becoming part of the working day.

The bigger question for employers is therefore not simply whether AI will replace people, but what happens to roles, skills and workforce decisions as people incorporate it into how they research, draft, analyse, plan and solve problems.

Employers are beginning to reconsider what good performance looks like. Hiring managers increasingly need to distinguish between people who can access AI and those who can use it critically, safely and effectively. AI adoption may be accelerating, but many organisations are still catching up with what that means for their workforce.

AI skills are becoming a baseline workplace expectation

For many roles, AI literacy is moving in the same direction as broader digital literacy: from a specialist capability to a basic expectation.

That doesn’t mean ever employee needs to be an AI expert, but it does mean employers are increasingly likely to expect people to understand how AI can support their work, where its limitations sit and when its output needs to be challenged.

As Matthew Munson, Managing Director at Talent Sydney, explains:

“AI skills have shifted from a nice-to-have to a baseline expectation for the vast majority of roles we recruit. We’re actively advising candidates on how to keep building their AI capability and stay abreast of emerging trends.”

But there’s an important distinction to be made between familiarity and capability.

Only 36% of respondents describe themselves as using AI to produce stronger, more useful outputs. A much larger proportion primarily use it for quick answers, research or one-off tasks. This suggests that while AI access is becoming widespread, the pool of genuinely capable users remains much thinner.

For hiring managers, asking whether a candidate “uses AI” will therefore reveal very little. A more valuable conversation explores how they use it, what they use it for, how they validate the result and whether it has improved the quality of their work.

The real change is happening inside jobs

The strongest evidence of AI’s workplace impact is currently found at task level.

Eighty-five percent of respondents say AI has made them more efficient at work, and more than half report meaningful time savings, while another 32% have seen gains across smaller or more specific tasks.

While it matters, efficiency doesn’t automatically mean a role has become simpler, or that the work has disappeared.

More than one in four respondents say AI primarily helps them start tasks rather than finish them, while 18% report spending more time reviewing or correcting AI-generated work.

In practice, this redistributes effort rather than removes it, with less time spent facing a blank page, gathering basic information or producing an initial draft. More time may then be required to assess quality, test assumptions, identify errors and turn a generic output into something useful in context.

The capability employers value will change accordingly.

Employees may be expected to produce work faster, but the strongest performers won’t simply be those who generate the most output. They’ll be the people who know which work should be accelerated, which decisions still require deeper thinking, and how to recognise when an AI-assisted answer is incomplete or wrong.

Human judgement is becoming increasingly more valuable

Loss of human judgement was the most common concern among survey respondents, ahead of data security, over-reliance and job security. At the same time, 57% identified relying on AI outputs without checking them as one of the highest-risk behaviours organisations now face.

This has clear implications for recruitment and assessing candidates.

A candidate can use AI to help prepare an application, respond to a technical question or complete an initial task. Employers therefore need stronger ways to understand the capability behind the output.

That could mean placing greater emphasis on work samples, follow-up questions and role-relevant scenarios. It may involve asking candidates to explain how they reached a conclusion, what they would verify and where they would avoid using AI altogether.

The objective shouldn’t be to catch people using AI. In many roles, its use will be both expected and beneficial, and the objective is to establish whether the person can apply it with sound judgement.

AI can make an average answer appear polished, but it can’t consistently replace the technical depth, commercial context or decision-making that determines whether the answer is useful.

Workforce planning is beginning to respond

Organisations are starting to adjust their workforce strategies, although the shift remains uneven.

Upskilling existing employees is currently the most common response, cited by 44% of respondents. Thirty-seven percent are reducing manual or repetitive work, while 22% are redesigning roles or workflows and the same proportion are hiring AI specialists. However, 26% say AI has not yet changed their workforce planning at all.

The emphasis on upskilling is sensible. The people already inside an organisation understand its customers, systems, processes and operating context, and that knowledge becomes especially valuable when applying AI to real work.

However, training employees to use new tools is only one part of the equation.

Employers also need to consider whether roles have been designed around outdated ways of working. If AI removes part of a task, what should replace it? If it increases output, who is responsible for checking quality? If a capability is now required across a function, should it remain concentrated in a specialist team?

These are workforce design questions, not simply technology questions.

What AI-capable talent looks like

There will not be one universal definition of an AI-capable employee. The required capability will vary by profession, seniority and the risks attached to the work.

However, the most valuable people are likely to combine several qualities:

• Relevant technical or professional expertise
• Confidence using AI in context
• Awareness of data and risk
• The ability to validate outputs
• The judgement to know when human intervention matters

As Thomas Mackenzie, Director of Client Services at Scale by Avec, puts it:

“AI is changing what great looks like, and the real advantage sits with the organisations that back people who can combine AI with the technical expertise and commercial judgement to deliver better outcomes, not just faster outputs.”

For employers, this means looking beyond generic claims of AI proficiency. For candidates and contractors, it means being prepared to demonstrate how AI has improved a genuine piece of work, not simply listing a tool on a CV.

The workforce can’t and won’t wait for a definitive answer on how AI will reshape every role, so the organisations best placed to respond will be those that treat AI capability as a workforce issue over just a technology one. That means defining what effective use looks like, redesigning work where necessary and backing people who can combine AI with the expertise, context and judgement it cannot provide on its own.

Our latest research reveals how more than 1,500 business leaders and technology professionals across Australia and New Zealand are navigating that shift. From everyday adoption and productivity gains to skills, trust and the future workforce, access the full report to see what employers should be preparing for next.

Economic uncertainty, shifting skills demand and the accelerating impact of AI are no longer separate conversations for business leaders.

Together, they’re converging and creating new pressure on organisations to adapt faster, plan with greater discipline and make smarter decisions about capability, technology and workforce investment.

This was the focus of Talent Auckland’s recent Leading the Way event hosted by New Zealand Country Manager, Kara Smith, bringing together two expert perspectives on the forces shaping business and the future workforce in Aotearoa: Wesley Tanuvasa, Economist at ASB, and John Valastro, Director – Digital Innovation and Growth at Avec.

Here are five key takeaways.

1. Leaders need to plan for volatility, not wait for certainty

Reflecting on the combined impact of geopolitical instability, oil-price pressure, inflation risk and weaker demand, Wesley’s key message for leaders: volatility is not a passing issue for organisations to wait out.

Describing the current environment as a “negative supply shock” (which is the economist way of saying that reduced supply is pushing prices higher), Wesley noted that the impact flows through supply chains quickly. And New Zealand businesses aren’t exempt.

“Anything that oil, LNG or fertiliser touches in the supply chain, is going to see a cost increase,” Wesley said.

While some firms may initially absorb those costs through lower margins, Wesley cautioned, “You can only do that for so long before you need to say, ‘Sorry, I need to pass this on now.’”

2. Supply security is becoming as important as supply efficiency

Wesley’s next message to business leaders was the need to rethink supply chains, market exposure and resilience.

For a small, trade-exposed economy like New Zealand, this means understanding where business risk sits and where alternatives exist. Organisations that have optimised only for efficiency may need to reassess whether their operating models are resilient enough for a more volatile environment.

“We used to always think, this is a once-in-100-year shock,” he said. “But we’ve had one every five years.”

Businesses can’t assume global conditions will stabilise quickly or that major shocks will remain rare. The takeaway for leaders is that resilience needs to be designed into strategy, supply relationships, workforce planning and customer markets.

3. AI is already inside your organisation

Shifting from economic outlook to organisation response, John Valastro broke down how businesses can move from AI experimentation to measurable ROI.

“You’ve got AI in the business, whether you like it or not,” John stated.

If employees are using personal AI tools to draft emails, summarise information, prepare documents or support analysis, then AI adoption is already happening. Without clear guidance, that creates risk around data privacy, security, quality control and inconsistent use.

For leaders, doing nothing is not a neutral position. AI adoption will still occur, but without the governance, ownership and safeguards needed to manage it well.

4. AI ROI comes from deliberate adoption, not more experimentation

“A lot of people are struggling to cross that chasm between experimentation to actual ROI,” shared John.

The organisations most likely to succeed with AI will be those that start with business value, not tools.

“If I’m going to answer the ROI question upfront, it comes from deliberate adoption rather than more experimentation.”

In practice, this means choosing use cases connected to real business problems, setting a baseline before starting, defining success measures, and ensuring there is clear ownership of the outcome.

John also made an important distinction between automation and AI. Automation remains valuable for rules-based deterministic work. AI is better suited to work requiring interpretation, coordination or decision support.

His message was: not every problem needs AI. The right tools should be matched to the right work.

5. Governance needs to be built in from day one

AI governance can’t be treated as an afterthought and, as John described, “In the context of AI, governance is part of the solution.”

This includes trusted data, security, accountability, traceability, human oversight, monitoring and escalation pathways. And he warns that one of the greatest risks with AI is that failure is not always obvious.

“The biggest risk with AI is less that it could fail, and more that it can fail silently,” said John.

For leaders, this means AI solutions must be designed with the right controls from the beginning. Organisations need to know who owns the outcome, who manages the risk, when humans need to remain involved and how success will be measured before scaling.

The bottom line

Between both guest speakers, one message stood out: leaders can’t wait for the market to become easier.

“We can’t just keep waiting for the calendar to tick over to some random arbitrary date,” said Kara. “We are going to have to outmanoeuvre and out-innovate our way out of this.”

The game is changing, and for organisations navigating the year ahead, the priority is clear: build resilience, invest in capability and adopt AI in a way that is practical, governed and connected to measurable business value.

Economic uncertainty, shifting skills demand, and the accelerating impact of AI are reshaping how organisations operate.

Our next Leading the Way: Market Outlook Briefing – a practical, insight-led session designed to help senior leaders make sense of what’s happening in the market and what it means for their organisations.

Hosted by Talent’s Managing Director, Kara Smith, the session brings together leading economic and technology perspectives on the forces shaping business and the future workforce in Aotearoa.

You’ll hear from two expert voices:

• Wesley Tanuvasa – Economist, ASB
  Sharing insights on the economic and labour market outlook for New Zealand and what current signals mean for business leaders.
• John Valastro – Director, Digital Innovation and Growth, Avec
  Exploring how organisations are moving from experimentation to ROI with AI.

We’re bringing together a select group of senior leaders from across Auckland for a focused discussion on the market forces shaping the year ahead.

If you’re responsible for strategy, capability, or workforce planning, this session will provide valuable perspective on what’s coming next.

New Zealand’s financial services sector is entering a phase defined less by incremental change and more by structural shift.

Across banking, insurance and fintech, three forces are converging at once: regulatory reform, large-scale technology transformation and a rapidly evolving ecosystem of partnerships. Together, they’re reshaping how the industry operates and how it hires.

For hiring managers and business leaders, the implication is: demand is becoming more complex, specialised, and harder to satisfy with traditional hiring approaches.

Regulation is driving transformation

In Wellington, where much of the country’s financial services decision-making sits, the shift is particularly visible.

“Wellington is mainly a head office and regulatory hub,” says Adeline Le Bris, Senior Recruitment Consultant from Talent Wellington. “The biggest change is that regulation is now driving most of the work, particularly around customer conduct, open banking, and risk and resilience.”

Historically, regulation has been treated as a compliance requirement alongside core delivery for many organisations. Today, it’s shaping the work itself.

The rollout of open banking under the Consumer Data Right (CDR) framework is a clear example. Major banks have moved beyond planning into active delivery, with API infrastructure now live or in phased rollout across the sector.

“There’s growing demand for people who can turn rules and policies into real changes across business and tech,” Adeline explains.

That includes:

• API and integration specialists
• Security and data experts
• Architects
• Business Analysts and delivery leads

However, technical capability is no longer enough. The market is also placing a premium on those who can navigate the regulatory context of risk, controls and compliance, alongside delivery.

What this means for hiring: Pure compliance or pure technology skillsets are no longer cutting it. Organisations need hybrid talent that can translate regulatory requirements into delivery.

Transformation has moved into execution

Across Auckland, particularly within insurance, organisations have moved into implementation, with proof of concepts now being embedded into core operations.

“Insurance providers have progressed from experimentation to implementing AI and automation tools, particularly in manual-heavy processes like claims,” says Shweta Chopra, Practice Lead based in Talent Auckland. “It’s happening cautiously, with guardrails, but the change has started.”

Alongside AI, there’s a broader wave of multi-year platform modernisation programmes underway that cut across technology, operations and customer service:

• Core system upgrades
• Cloud migration
• Large-scale CRM implementations
• Integration of previously siloed services

There is also a parallel increase in remediation and data-focused work as a direct consequence of regulatory pressure and transformation complexity. As systems evolve, so does the need to ensure data quality, governance and compliance.

What this means for hiring: Organisations need technically strong talent who can delivery within complex, regulated transformation programmes.

The ecosystem is converging

“The fintech ecosystem in New Zealand is pretty buoyant at the moment,” says JP Browne, Practice Manager. “It’s one of the fastest growing sectors.”

That growth is being accelerated by open banking which has expanded the role fintechs can play within the broader ecosystem. With banks required to support payments and data sharing via APIs, fintechs are increasingly building on top of existing infrastructure rather than having to compete directly.

“What we’re seeing is fintechs providing more of a customer experience layer,” JP explains. “While banks are adapting their environments to support that integration.”

And it’s driving closer collaboration, with regulation and competitive pressure pushing banks towards partnership models, and fintechs maturing into more regulated, compliance-aware organisations.

What this means for hiring: Demand for professionals who can operate across product, technology, and regulatory environments.

Capability mismatch

Across Wellington and Auckland, organisations are struggling to find talent with the right combination of skills.

“The hardest roles to fill are people who can do more than one thing well,” says Adeline. “Programme and transformation leads, business analysts with banking knowledge, architects, senior risk and compliance people, cyber and security specialists.”

These roles are difficult to fill because while the market is asking for hybrid capability, the talent pool remains relatively specialised.

At the same time, technical demand is intensifying with sustained need for:

• API and integration engineers
• Data engineers
• Platform engineers
• Cybersecurity specialists

These are not interchangeable skillsets and in a market the size of New Zealand, supply is constrained.

Layered with the shifting expectations across the financial services ecosystem and the definition of ‘top talent’ is creating structural tension.

What this means for hiring: Highly specific hybrid skillsets are increasingly in demand but difficult to source locally.

A market at an inflection point

New Zealand’s financial services sector is being reshaped.

Regulation is driving transformation, transformation is accelerating ecosystem change, and together they’re redefining what capability looks like across the industry.

This creates both risk and opportunity.

Organisations who continue to approach hiring through a traditional lens will find it increasingly difficult to compete for the talent they need. On the other hand, those who align their hiring strategy with the realities of transformation, regulation and ecosystem change will be better positioned to deliver.

In a market this interconnected, hiring is a strategic level that will play a defining role in how the next phase of unfolds.

If you’re navigating transformation, regulatory change or evolving hiring needs, our team brings deep, on-the-ground insight across New Zealand’s financial services sector market. Get in touch to discuss where your talent strategy needs to adapt.

While permanent hiring has become more measured, contract demand in New Zealand remains strong in areas tied to delivery certainty, governance, cybersecurity and cloud transformation.

In both Auckland and Wellington, organisations are cautious about headcount growth but still require specialist capability to deliver critical programs. The result? Premium daily rates for high-impact contractors.

Below are the top 10 highest paying tech contract roles in New Zealand right now, based on national average day rates.

10. DevSecOps Engineer – $1,280 per day

DevSecOps Engineers are increasingly valued in organisations modernising cloud environments and tightening compliance frameworks. In Wellington, this demand is reinforced by public sector security scrutiny, while Auckland’s enterprise environments are investing in secure-by-design architecture as AI and automation adoption grows.

Contractors who can integrate CI/CD with strong security posture remain highly bankable.

9. Cloud Security Engineer – $1,280 per day

Across New Zealand, secure cloud migration, identity governance, and resilience planning are key themes. With cloud adoption maturing, the focus has shifted from lift-and-shift to optimisation and risk control.

Given the relatively shallow local senior talent pool and ongoing migration to Australia, experienced Cloud Security Engineers continue to command strong daily rates.

8. Cloud Architect – $1,280 per day

Cloud Architects remain central to transformation programs, particularly where legacy modernisation and AI readiness intersect.

In Auckland’s enterprise market, demand is tied to platform scalability and digital growth. In Wellington, secure cloud delivery aligned with governance frameworks is a recurring priority.

Cloud Architects are often brought in on contract to accelerate defined programs rather than support open-ended transformation mandates.

7. Cybersecurity Architect – $1,280 per day

Cybersecurity Architects are consistently engaged to uplift security posture, implement Zero Trust frameworks and support secure-by-design initiatives.

In Wellington, national resilience and public sector compliance requirements continue to sustain demand. Across industries, boards are increasingly scrutinising security maturity, making senior contract capability valuable during periods of audit or remediation.

Cyber remains one of the few areas where demand continues to outpace supply.

6. PMO Manager – $1,304 per day

As organisations operate under tighter fiscal conditions, governance and oversight have become critical, and PMO Managers are being engaged to:

• Stabilise delivery portfolios
• Improve reporting and spend visibility
• Strengthen program discipline

In Wellington, particularly within public sector environments, structured oversight remains a priority as departments balance fiscal constraint with delivery readiness.

5. Technical Architect – $1,320 per day

Technical Architects continue to play a key role in targeted transformation initiatives. And rather than building large in-house teams, many organisations are leveraging contract architects to:

• Define solution roadmaps
• Accelerate delivery
• Provide specialist oversight

With hiring selective across the permanent market, contractors provide flexibility while still delivering depth of expertise.

4. Program Manager – $1,344 per day

Program Managers remain highly valued in New Zealand’s contracting landscape.

Large-scale transformation programs continue across both Auckland enterprise and Wellington public sector environments, but with sharper budget scrutiny.

Experienced Program Managers who can demonstrate delivery under constrained conditions and manage complex stakeholder environments command premium day rates.

3. Cybersecurity Consultant – $1,360 per day

Cybersecurity Consultants are frequently engaged to address specific risk, audit, and remediation projects. And demand is particularly strong where organisations need short-term uplift in:

• GRC capability
• Incident response readiness
• Compliance alignment

With cybersecurity consistently highlighted as a board-level issue, contract specialists remain in demand across both public and private sectors.

2. Enterprise Architect – $1,440 per day

Enterprise Architects remain one of the most valuable contract hires in 2026 as organisations reassess digital investment and align AI strategy with long-term architecture.

Contract Enterprise Architects are often engaged to:

• Rationalise legacy estates
• Improve cost efficiency
• Align platforms with strategic outcomes

In Wellington, this role is particularly relevant within structured government transformation environments.

1. IDAM Consultant – $1,520 per day

Identity and Access Management (IDAM) Consultants top the list in 2026.

As cloud environments expand and AI tools proliferate, identity governance has become a critical control point, and organisations are investing heavily in:

• IAM framework design
• Privileged access management
• Zero Trust implementation

In both Auckland and Wellington, identity capability is increasingly viewed as foundational to security maturity.

Given the niche nature of this skillset and limited senior supply locally, IDAM Consultants currently command the highest average day rate in New Zealand.

What does this tell us about the NZ contracting market?

The highest day rates in 2026 reflect three clear realities:

1. Cybersecurity continues to outpace supply
2. Governance and oversight remain critical in a fiscally disciplined environment
3. Architecture capability is leveraged flexibly via contract engagement

Unlike previous expansionary cycles, contracting in 2026 is less about rapid scaling and more about targeted impact.

Organisations are choosing carefully where to lock in permanent capability and where to flex through specialist contractors.

Explore deeper salary and contracting insights

These figures reflect national average day rates across New Zealand. To understand how contracting trends are evolving, explore key hiring market trends in our latest More Than Money Salary Guide.

If you’re curious to see what’s ranking in the world of perm, find out 2026’s top 10 tech salaries in Australia or search benchmarks directly in our salary guide.

Last updated: 9 March 2026

New Zealand’s tech hiring market in 2026 has become sharper.

Business confidence has improved from recent lows, yet many organisations remain disciplined. Hiring trends are tightly aligned to resilience, governance and measurable impact, making broad team expansions rare and targeted capability uplift more common.

At the top of the pay curve, one pattern is clear: Architecture and cybersecurity leadership dominate, with AI capability predicted to rapidly climb.

Below are the top 10 highest paying tech jobs in New Zealand right now, based on national average permanent salaries (excluding C-suite and Heads of).

Note: Emerging AI role salaries are indicative estimates, informed by industry benchmarks and Talent’s global market data, contextualised for New Zealand context.

10. Data & AI Manager – $196k

As AI adoption cautiously moves from experimentation to operationalisation, organisations are prioritising leadership that can align data strategy with governance and commercial outcomes.

In Auckland’s enterprise market, this demand is increasingly tied to digital scale and export growth. In Wellington, governance and responsible AI frameworks are key drivers.

The premium sits with leaders who can balance innovation with risk management.

9. AI Solutions Architect – $195k

AI Solutions Architects are emerging as strategic hires as organisations move beyond proof-of-concept projects.

Across New Zealand, hiring demand is strongest where AI is tied directly to measurable ROI; particularly in larger enterprise and public sector environments.

In Auckland, organisations are embedding AI into customer experience, digital commerce and analytics platforms.

In Wellington, AI initiatives are more policy-aligned, with scrutiny around data integrity and long-term impact.

While the domestic market is still maturing, compensation reflects global competition for experienced AI architects and the limited local supply of professionals with production deployment experience.

8. AI Principal Engineer – $196k

Senior AI engineers capable of moving beyond proof-of-concept into production deployment are commanding strong premiums internationally and New Zealand will soon begin to follow suit.

Demand remains selective rather than volume-driven. Employers are prioritising:

• End-to-end delivery capability
• Strong data foundations
• Security-conscious design

Although the domestic AI market is still maturing, global benchmarks suggest sustained upward pressure on senior AI engineering compensation.

7. Agent Architect – $196k

Agent-based AI architecture is still emerging in New Zealand, but forward-looking organisations are exploring automation and orchestration at scale.

Compensation reflects scarcity more than hiring volume. Professionals with global exposure or hands-on deployment experience in agentic workflows are particularly attractive in a small market with limited local precedent.

6. Cybersecurity Manager – $200k

Cybersecurity investment remains one of the most protected areas of technology spend.

Across both public and private sectors, organisations continue to prioritise governance, risk and compliance, identity management, and incident readiness.

In Wellington, public sector scrutiny and policy alignment sustain demand for senior cyber leadership. Nationally, cyber capability continues to outpace available talent, supporting elevated remuneration.

5. Program Manager – $200k

Large-scale transformation continues across New Zealand, but under tighter financial discipline.

Hiring demand is focused on delivery certainty rather than expansion and organisations are seeking experienced Program Managers who can:

• Manage budget scrutiny
• Navigate stakeholder complexity
• Deliver outcomes under constrained conditions

In Wellington, where public sector investment cycles influence hiring momentum, experienced programme oversight remains particularly valued.

4. Technical Consultant – $200k

Senior Technical Consultants remain highly valued, particularly those with deep expertise in enterprise platforms, cloud transformation and regulated environments.

With ongoing migration of experienced professionals to Australia, supply constraints persist in specialist skill areas. As a result, proven consultants with domain depth and commercial awareness continue to command strong salaries.

3. Technical Architect – $200k

Technical Architects continue to anchor digital transformation initiatives.

In 2026, the expectation has shifted from solution design alone to measurable impact and employers are prioritising architects who can:

• Align technical design with enterprise strategy
• Integrate AI-readiness into broader ecosystems
• Design secure, scalable environments

Selective hiring conditions mean only candidates with demonstrated delivery experience are commanding top-tier compensation.

2. Enterprise Architect – $215k

Enterprise Architects remain central to long-term technology strategy across New Zealand.

As organisations reassess cost, risk and scalability, Enterprise Architects are increasingly tasked with:

• Rationalising legacy systems
• Aligning cloud and data strategies
• Embedding governance frameworks
• Supporting AI integration at scale

In larger enterprise and government environments, this strategic oversight remains indispensable.

1. Cybersecurity Architect – $225k

Cybersecurity Architects top the New Zealand list in 2026.

As cyber threats grow in sophistication and regulatory expectations tighten, secure-by-design capability is no longer optional.

Across industries, demand is strongest for professionals who can:

• Design secure cloud architectures
• Implement Zero Trust frameworks
• Align security strategy with enterprise transformation

In Wellington, public sector infrastructure and national resilience priorities reinforce sustained demand. Nationally, the limited pool of senior cyber architecture talent is keeping salaries elevated.

What does this tell us about the NZ market in 2026?

Three clear themes define New Zealand’s highest tech salaries:

1. Cybersecurity demand continues to outpace supply
2. Architecture roles remain central to disciplined transformation
3. AI capability is rising with a governance-first lens

Unlike previous boom cycles, 2026 is characterised by deliberate investment rather than rapid headcount growth.

Emerging AI roles reflect global benchmarks and international competition for talent, while established architecture and cybersecurity roles remain anchored in consistent local demand.

Explore deeper salary insights

These figures reflect national permanent averages across tech roles. For the latest region-specific hiring outlooks, explore our:

• Auckland Market Update
• Wellington Market Update

Find out what made the top 10 contract day rates for New Zealand or search for detailed benchmarks in our More Than Money Salary Guide to ensure your offers or expectations truly reflect market demand.

Last updated: 8 March 2026

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.

We’re hosting an ENGAGE-exclusive webinar to share our latest hiring market updates across Australia and New Zealand, and what they mean for contractors heading into 2026.

Hosted by JP Browne, Steve Jobson, and Sophia Parrelli, this session will unpack what we’re seeing on the ground — from where demand is lifting, to which skills are commanding attention, and how contractors can stay competitive in a more selective market.

We’ll cover:

• Predictions for the 2026 contract market across AU and NZ
• The hottest skills and capabilities in demand
• Regional hotspots and where opportunities are emerging
• How AI, infrastructure and transformation work are reshaping contract roles
• Practical ways to position yourself ahead of the competition

We’ll also leave time for a live Q&A, where you can submit your questions and hear directly from our recruitment experts.

Whether you’re actively contracting, considering your next move, or simply want a clearer view of what’s ahead, this session will give you a grounded, practical update on the 2026 market.

Session information

Date: Thursday, 12th March

Time: 12:00pm AEDT // 2:00pm NZDT

Where: Online via Zoom

Your Talent experts

JP Browne

JP is a Practice Manager from Auckland who has worked in tech recruitment for over 20 years. JP specialises in recruiting for C-Suite and leadership teams as well as project transformation.

Music is a big passion of JP’s and his vinyls have pride of place in his office. When not listening to music, he’s learning the piano and dreams of taking up the bagpipes again, and when the weather allows he’ll be doing a very average job of playing golf.

Steve Jobson

Steve is an Account Director in our Canberra office with over 26 years’ recruitment experience. He specialises in delivering ICT capability across Defence, the APS and ACT Government, with deep expertise in cleared recruitment and secure project environments.

Outside of work, Steve’s interests lean toward the action and espionage genre — his bookshelf is stacked with Tom Clancy, Jack Carr, Brad Thor, Vince Flynn, Gregg Hurwitz and Mark Greaney. When he’s not immersed in a spy thriller, you’ll likely find him on the golf course or at the driving range.

Sophia Parrelli

Sophia is an Account Executive in our Sydney team with over five years’ recruitment experience. She partners with a range of corporate clients across technology, transformation, project services, engineering, and broader corporate functions.

When she’s not talking hiring strategy, Sophia can be found attempting pottery (with mixed results) or embracing her newest and most demanding role: full-time dog mum to her chaotic seven-month-old puppy, Bernie.

Find out more about contracting at Talent.

Shadow IT. Every organisation has it. Employees adopting new tools without official approval because it helps them get the job done faster. Now we’re seeing its next evolution: shadow AI. And it’s spreading faster than most leaders realise.

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

“The use of AI tools is prolific in every organisation, and it kind of just happened. Executives are scrambling to catch up, to either capitalise on it or put some structure around it.”

From staff pasting data into ChatGPT to marketing teams using generative tools for campaigns, shadow AI is already shaping workflows, decisions, and customer interactions. The question is: will your organisation keep pace, or fall behind?

The upside of shadow AI

It’s tempting to see shadow AI only as a risk. And yes, it comes with security, compliance, and ethical challenges. But there’s also a huge opportunity: grassroots innovation.

“Most of the experiments we’ve seen start with individuals in departments,” JP says. “They’re dabbling to find productivity gains or new insights, and that’s what’s forcing organisations to pay attention.”

In other words, shadow AI is where many of the best use cases are discovered. It’s employees closest to the problem spotting where AI can create value. Ignoring that would be a mistake.

The risks leaders can’t ignore

Of course, there is a dark side. Shadow AI introduces risks that can’t be brushed off:

• Data leaks. Sensitive customer data pasted into public AI tools can breach privacy laws and contracts.
• Security gaps. AI-generated code may introduce vulnerabilities that slip past standard reviews.
• Compliance issues. Using unapproved tools in regulated industries can expose companies to fines or reputational damage.

Jack Jorgensen, General Manager of Data, AI & Innovation at our IT delivery arm Avec, recalls:

“We’ve seen AI drop entire databases and then apologise. If you’re not putting guardrails around this, you’re gambling with your business.”

Why locking it down doesn’t work

Some organisations’ instinct is to ban AI tools outright but that would be a losing battle. Employees will find workarounds if the technology genuinely helps them.

Instead, leaders need to acknowledge shadow AI as a reality and bring it into the light.

“You can’t just bury your head in the sand,” JP stresses. “AI is in everything now, even your phone updates. The only question is whether you create a framework for using it safely.”

Turning shadow AI into an advantage

So, how do you harness the innovation of shadow AI without exposing your business to unnecessary risk? Start with three steps:

1. Listen first. Find out what employees are already using and why. Often these experiments highlight gaps in existing tools or processes.
2. Set clear guardrails. Develop policies around data security, compliance, and acceptable use. Make them practical so employees don’t feel forced underground.
3. Encourage responsible innovation. Provide safe sandboxes or approved platforms where staff can test and share ideas.

Jack’s advice:

“Don’t focus on speed for the sake of it. Focus on building velocity and a foundation that lets you scale safely and keep experimenting.”

The innovation edge

Shadow AI is a sign your people are hungry to innovate. Rather than suppressing it, leaders should channel it. The companies that do will move faster, find better use cases, and keep their competitive edge, and those that don’t risk being left behind by their competitors and their own employees.

Shadow AI isn’t a threat to stamp out. It’s a wave to ride. The businesses that embrace it with the right guardrails will unlock innovation and the ones that don’t will spend the next five years scrambling to catch up.

Discover how other organisations are navigating shadow AI in our AI survey results.

AI is changing the way we work faster than most organisations can adapt. Tools like ChatGPT and Microsoft Copilot are already baked into everyday workflows. But here’s the catch: the more we rely on AI, the more critical thinking becomes the skill that separates the leaders from the laggards.

As Jack Jorgensen, General Manager of Data, AI & Innovation at our IT delivery arm Avec, explains:

“It’s easy to get caught up in the speed AI gives you. But if you don’t understand the problem you’re solving or what happens when the system breaks, you’re setting yourself up for failure.”

AI is powerful, but it’s not infallible. And in a world where outputs can look convincing but still be completely wrong, critical thinking is the safeguard every professional needs.

The productivity trap

Many organisations rush into AI adoption with a focus on speed. How quickly can we roll this out? How much time can we save? That’s short-term thinking.

“Velocity is more important than speed,” Jack notes. “It’s not about being first to market with a shiny AI tool. It’s about building solid foundations so you can scale safely and sustainably.”

Critical thinking shifts the focus from how fast to how valuable. It asks: is this solving the right problem? Is it secure? Is it ethical? Does it actually add value for the business or customer?

Spotting the flaws

For those of us who use AI daily, spotting the flaws can feel obvious; six fingers on a generated image, or a chatbot confidently inventing a source. But as JP Browne, Practice Manager from Talent Auckland points out, it’s not always that simple:

“It’s getting harder and harder to tell what’s AI-generated. And that’s a huge risk if people stop questioning what they see.”

Critical thinkers don’t just accept outputs at face value. They test, validate, and challenge. That mindset is what prevents AI from becoming a liability instead of an asset.

Why this matters for every role

Critical thinking isn’t just for data scientists or IT leaders. It’s for recruiters screening AI-written CVs, finance teams reviewing AI-generated forecasts, and executives reading AI-drafted reports.

JP has already seen how over-reliance on automation can backfire in recruitment:

“Candidates are using AI to craft brilliant cover letters, but the CV doesn’t match the job. If you don’t apply a human lens, you’ll make bad hiring decisions.”

In other words, AI can help filter and accelerate, but without human judgment the wrong calls get made.

Building critical thinking in the AI era

So how do you make critical thinking a core skill in your team? Here are three steps:

1. Teach healthy scepticism. Encourage employees to question AI outputs, not just accept them.
2. Build human-in-the-loop processes. Always pair AI automation with human oversight where decisions impact people, money, or reputation.
3. Normalise checking sources. Whether it’s data, content, or code, make verification a cultural habit.

As Jack says:

“AI should be an enabler, not the thing doing all the work. Human judgment is what makes AI outputs valuable.”

The edge that can never be automated

The irony is that in a world obsessed with automation, the most valuable skills are the ones that can’t be automated. Curiosity. Scepticism. Judgment. Context.

Critical thinking isn’t just another “soft skill.” It’s the hardest edge businesses have in protecting themselves against AI risks and in making sure AI delivers genuine competitive advantage.

In the age of AI, the real superpower isn’t knowing how to prompt a chatbot. It’s knowing how to think critically about what it gives you. The leaders who sharpen that skill and build it across their teams will be the ones who thrive.

Find out how other organisations are navigating the changing AI landscape in our most recent AI report.