Career development

 3w

Woman lands job after CEO asks why she shouldn't be hired: 'I wasn't ready for that question'


It's surprising how interviewers are finding creative ways to test candidates, sometimes asking questions that seem almost impossible to answer on the spot.

Recently, a woman experienced this firsthand and turned it into an opportunity that landed her a job.

According to the post, during her interview, the CEO asked her to give one good reason why she shouldn't be hired.

Katyayani Shukla... shared the incident on X (formerly Twitter) with the caption, "During my last job interview, the CEO asked me to give her one good reason not to hire me."

"I told her I wasn't ready for that question and needed some time to think," she adds.

Most people might have expected the CEO to forget, but a few hours later, she received a follow-up message requesting her response. After reflecting carefully, Shukla wrote her answer, and the result was a job offer.

She began by apologising if her answer was long, explaining that it came from careful thought.

"A good reason not to hire me is that I have my life together. What that means for me is that I keep my personal and professional life organised," the email reads.

Shukla further explained that she has her time to work, usually around 9 to 5 on weekdays, and she sets boundaries to keep work inside those hours.

"I genuinely believe that when everything is urgent, nothing is urgent," she adds.

She added that setting boundaries is important for people to respect her as a professional. While some may appreciate that, others might see it as a red flag.

"Being organised and mindful of my time, and other people's time, is very important to me," the email further read. more
5   

  • f h

    1h

    That’s an excellent response, it emphasizes strong work ethics, boundaries and expectations up front. If that answer did not result in a job offer... then perhaps it may not be a supportive work culture.  more

  • Rigor Data Analyst

    1
    4d

    A strong answer to this question isn’t about disqualifying yourself, it’s about showing self-awareness, honesty, and growth without raising red flags.... The key is to frame a manageable limitation and show how you actively address it. more

Load more...

Jessica Miller


Career development 1d
I just got back from a job interview and have mixed feelings. They kept trying to confuse me and make me feel bad. At the start, they asked me to tell them about myself. I began talking about my duties at my last job, but they said they didn’t want memorized answers, they wanted real achievements.
Then they asked if I had taken a certain test. I said no (I’d never even heard of it) and they told... me that meant I failed it and got the lowest score. At the end the HR person said they had wasted their time talking to me and that their time is valuable.
Is this how interviews are done now to test how well people handle stress?

 more

  • Anthony Wambua

    4h

    While not excusing their behaviour, they could have been more explicit about the expected answers. In future presentations, you could approach the... same question - from a measured performance angle e.g. In undertaking activities /actions - xyz, I managed to increase efficiency in the systems/reduced delivery time/increased client base/ etc etc by this %. Go on to provide proof ---The evidence is captured in my employee of the month/ annual review report/recommendation letter etc etc.  more

  • jeff driscoll

    1d

    That wasn't an interview, they wasted YOUR time! If this is a company run by lawyers, they are "documenting" reasons not to hire you. Move on and good... luck! more

    2
Load more...

Career development

 4h

No replies, no rejections: What's behind the growing silence in hiring? - The Times of India


A young graduate in Delhi refreshes her inbox for the tenth time that day. She has sent out more than a hundred applications in a matter of weeks, each one carefully edited, each one carrying a measure of hope. Nothing arrives. No rejection, no acknowledgement, only silence that stretches longer with each passing day. Her experience is no longer an exception. It is fast becoming the norm.A recent... report by pre-employment testing firm Criteria, cited by Fortune, confirms what job seekers have been quietly enduring: employers are increasingly failing to respond, and the trend is worsening year after year.The data is stark. More than half of job seekers, 53%, reported being ghosted in the past year, according to Criteria's findings. The rise has been steady and troubling, climbing from 38% in 2024 to 48% in 2025. At what point did acknowledgement itself become too much to ask?At first glance, it is easy to place the blame on unresponsive recruiters or overburdened hiring teams. But the reality runs deeper.The hiring process has been reshaped by technology. With the aid of artificial intelligence, candidates can create their own résumés and apply to jobs on an unprecedented scale. Thousands of candidates can apply to a single job posting in a matter of hours.Efficiency on one side of the equation breeds overload on the other side of the equation. Recruiting teams are left to sort through a mountain of applications, often struggling to find meaningful differentiations between candidates. The more applications they get, the less they can meaningfully engage with each one.And so, responses slow down. In many cases, they stop altogether.The résumé, once a personal and laboriously created document, is becoming less effective as a gauge of potential because the technology is constantly improving the language, structure, and keyword content, and all applicants seem to have the same level of polish.On paper, everyone is a good match. Everyone is a good fit. But what happens when everyone is a good match, and everyone is a good fit? This raises a pressing question:If everyone seems like the right fit, how does anyone get chosen?Silence is only one part of the problem. The other is more unsettling. A 2024 report by MyPerfectResume revealed that 81% of recruiters admitted their organisations post roles that are either already filled or never existed.The reasons vary. Some companies aim to maintain visibility on job platforms. Others test how listings perform or gather insights about competitors and the market.For employers, these may be calculated decisions. For job seekers, they represent wasted time and misplaced hope.Applications are written, forms completed, interviews sometimes even attended -- all for opportunities that were never truly open.What does this do to the credibility of the hiring process?The narrative is often framed as a failure of employers to respond. But the system itself is under strain. Candidates apply in large numbers because they expect silence. Employers respond less frequently because they are overwhelmed by volume.This, in turn, encourages the other side to respond in a similar way, creating a cycle that is difficult to reverse.Somewhere along the way, the purpose of recruitment, which is to link people to meaningful work, has become secondary to the process itself.There is a person behind every statistic. Silence, repeated over time, erodes one's confidence. It fills one's mind with doubt, where before there was clarity.Job candidates start to wonder if they're good enough, if they made the right decisions, if they're worthwhile in the job market. Without feedback, they don't know how to get better, they don't know what they did wrong.As a result, some are going to extreme lengths to get noticed: directly contacting hiring managers, showing up to offices, seeking online fame.But should visibility require this level of persistence?The questions now are difficult but necessary: Should companies be held accountable for failing to respond to applicants? Is it ethical to advertise roles that are not genuinely open? And in an age where AI shapes every application, what will replace the résumé as a measure of merit? Until these questions are addressed, silence will continue to define the job search. And for millions of applicants, the hardest part will not be rejection, it will be not being seen at all. more

Career development

 5h

Working Strategies: Is it really the end of résumés?


Elon Musk doesn't want your résumé, at least for his AI5 chip design team - he only wants three bullet points describing the toughest technical problems you've solved. Jeff Taylor, the founder of Monster.com, doesn't want résumés, either. Having created a platform that manages millions of résumés annually, he now believes they have outlived their usefulness. He favors candidate dossiers instead,... preferably housed on his new platform, BoomBand.

Musk and Taylor are far from unique in their views about the demise of résumés. Indeed, I've seen this prediction come and go plenty of times. Whether the culprit was going to be the internet, video profiles, LinkedIn profiles, online job boards, "universal" online job applications or artificial intelligence, the alert has always been the same: We don't need résumés anymore; they're going to disappear.

In some cases, the opposite happened. When online job postings replaced print ads, the tide turned to ... multiple résumés per person. Now instead of mailing a pre-printed résumé in response to a newspaper ad, applicants began creating new résumés for every online posting. And voila - in lieu of eliminating résumés altogether, typical candidates had (have) dozens of résumés, each telling a slightly different story.

So what's really going to happen with résumés? I don't know, but I'm pretty sure they're not going to disappear. Not because they're such great tools but because we haven't found anything better.

At their best, résumés summarize a candidate's work and education in a concise and compelling format. Of course, at their worst, résumés go on and on about the wrong things or fail to say anything at all. At their worst-worst? They're produced and distributed by artificial intelligence in such abundance that hiring managers suffocate under their weight.

And that, in a nutshell, might be one reason this year's prediction of the résumé's demise could actually come true. Already, online job postings are exclaiming "No résumé needed!" Instead, they welcome the candidate to complete the online application, skipping the cover letter as well.

Hmm. My job is to tell you when something smells fishy, and, well, p-yew.

Here's the problem: Choosing between résumés, applications or even dossiers when applying online is about as much of a choice as deciding which swimsuit to wear on the Titanic. You might look fabulous in one or the other, but the ship's still going down.

The issue isn't the résumé, it's the online system. And before that, the issue was the newspaper advertising system. Why? Because most job openings aren't advertised, regardless of the platform. Which in turn means job seekers solve the wrong problem when they try to improve on their response to advertised jobs.

Which leaves us where, exactly? Back to using résumés, because that's how you tell your story to networking contacts who are going to lead you to those unadvertised jobs.

To make the best of this situation, you need to think from the recipient's perspective. These are people, not AI bots or applicant tracking systems. They're not scanning for keywords; they're reading a story about a person - also not a bot! - who could become their employee, colleague and friend.

So give them a story. Create that profile or summary statement, frontload your strengths and best skills, write those descriptions of your best projects and achievements in jobs past, describe your volunteer and community work, share those hobbies and interests. In short, treat the person reading your résumé like a person. And then send the résumé to people instead of machines.

In the meantime, what about Musk's three bullet points and Taylor's dossiers? You can take the best from these ideas without getting tangled up in someone's "better mousetrap." For example, identifying a key project or achievement and learning to tell it in three short parts (bullets) is the heart of behavioral interviewing; it's a good skill to learn.

Likewise, dossiers are essentially portfolios - multi-modal ways of showing your skills. Instead of trusting your materials to someone else's platform (or in addition), why not create your own short website, replete with your "show and tell"?

Here's the bottom line: Applications - in whatever platform they appear - are the employer's tool, designed to reveal your weak spots while quashing the parts that make you human. Résumés are the candidate's tool, a blank page standing ready to present the whole, best you. You just need to remember that online bots don't care, so skip that delivery system and tell your story to the humans.

There's another job search tool you'll want to know about. Skills-testing is making a comeback, helping employers really understand which candidates can do the job. Come back next week for a closer look at modern versions of this blast from the past. more

Career development

 6h

AI Is Hastening the Résumé's Demise. Good Riddance


Artificial intelligence isn't just being blamed for killing jobs; it's exposing the fundamental flaw in one of hiring's oldest tools: the résumé.

Thanks to AI, any applicant can churn out a polished, professional-looking version with a few basic prompts -- regardless of their qualifications. Frustrated companies have responded in kind by deploying the technology to sort the submissions.

The... methods may have changed, but this is a familiar tug-of-war. For close to a century, the résumé has been the focus of an intense struggle between job seekers hoping to present themselves in the most flattering light and employers eager to find the best candidate. But its usefulness was short-lived at best and should have been replaced with a better way to evaluate job seekers long ago.

Though it's possible to find documents that look vaguely like a résumé prior to the 1920s, the version we know today came into its own that decade. Researchers in what's now known as industrial and organizational psychology grappled with a challenge confronting large corporations: what was the best way to screen the applications of hundreds of job candidates about whom next to nothing was known?

Up until then, many employers placed great reliance on a "Letter of Application," or what we would simply call a cover letter. Then, as now, it invited applicants to explain why they were particularly qualified or well-suited for a particular job, noting their experience, talents, and temperament.

Donald Laird, a professor at Colgate University, thought it was ridiculous that managers would rely on these letters to pick the best candidates. In his popular 1925 book, The Psychology of Selecting Men, he heaped scorn on the cover letter. He pointed to a number of real-world experiments showing that applicants tended to overstate their qualifications and otherwise mislead potential employers.

Nonetheless, managers put great faith in them. To counter this, Lairdpublicized a number of tests that demonstrated how managers could be easily gulled by the inflated self-assessments of job applicants, or simply react in subjective, unpredictable ways. A candidate whom one manager ranked first would be ranked last by another. When shown the same letters a month later, some managers completely reversed their initial judgment.

Laird and other members of the industrial and organizational psychology field advocated for "scientific" methods of assessing job candidates, such as objective tests of skill -- for example, a typing test. They also advanced the heretical idea that the standard "Letter of Application" should come with a sobering chaser: a dull, just-the-facts recitation of the applicant's job history, education, references and other objective data. Initially, researchers called it a "data sheet" or "qualifications brief." Whatever the name, make no mistake: the résumé had arrived.

Applicants quickly realized that the new addition, far from being an obstacle to selling themselves, could be a useful tool in the struggle to stand out from others. In a confession from 1952, one job candidate described how he had typed up his résumé and then brought it to a copy shop, paying extra for a printing process that "makes each piece look as if it is a hand-typed original" -- proof that the résumé in question had been specially prepared for this one position. Then he sent out 100 copies to different organizations.

With that hack, job candidates began submitting résumés regardless of whether a job opening asked for one. In 1958, the Wall Street Journal interviewed an executive from a placement firm, who reported: "We send out about 50,000 resumes a week. Ten years ago, it was closer to 500." An executive with Borg-Warner Corporation likewise declared: "Everybody in middle management keeps a résumé handy these days. It's just part of the businessman's briefcase."

Increasingly, human resources departments noticed that applicants used the résumé to tell white lies, and even bigger fibs, listing fictitious degrees, fake promotions and other embellishments.

By 1968, the Journal found that résumé padding had reached epidemic proportions. "Most firms say they tolerate -- and even expect -- a certain amount of fudging in applicants' resumes," the paper reported. A personnel manager was quoted as saying, "Most of us have a tendency to look the other way when a guy who looks like a real winner is caught in a small lie."

When the '70s and '80s came around, employers confronted an additional challenge: the rise of a new industry dedicated to helping job candidates draft the best possible résumés. There wasn't anything inherently wrong with this, but outsourcing the writing to professionals only underscored the degree to which this humble document, once meant to blunt the puffery of the cover letter, had now become the leading weapon in the job seeker's arsenal.

In 1996, hired-gun résumé writers even got their own professional organization: the National Résumé Writers Association. The advent of the internet around the same time made a growing number of résumé-writing templates and guides available to anyone with a modem.

Sign up for the Bloomberg Opinion bundle

Sign up for the Bloomberg Opinion bundle

Sign up for the Bloomberg Opinion bundle

Get Matt Levine's Money Stuff, John Authers' Points of Return and Jessica Karl's Opinion Today.

Get Matt Levine's Money Stuff, John Authers' Points of Return and Jessica Karl's Opinion Today.

Get Matt Levine's Money Stuff, John Authers' Points of Return and Jessica Karl's Opinion Today.

Bloomberg may send me offers and promotions.

Plus Signed UpPlus Sign UpPlus Sign Up

By submitting my information, I agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.

It's no wonder we've forgotten that sheet of paper's original function. As one workplace expert told the New York Times in 2006: "A good résumé is not simply a rehash of past responsibilities, it's a celebration of successes." To that, I say it's time for more employers to rediscover the virtues of screening applicants by administering skills tests and having prospective employees work for (paid) trial periods before tendering a formal offer.

The résumé may have been created with good intentions, but it has never performed the job it was supposed to do. It's time to let it go.

More from Bloomberg Opinion:

* You Won't Find Salvation in AI: Catherine Thorbecke

* AI Hype Is Proving to Be a Solow's Paradox: Stephen Mihm

* Some AI Gig Workers Make $1,000 an Hour. Can That Last?: Parmy Olson

Want more from Bloomberg Opinion? OPIN . Or subscribe to our daily newsletter. more

Anonymous member


Career development 20h
Hi, I need some advice about hygiene at work. In our office WC there is liquid soap, but since many companies share the floor, it keeps disappearing- someone is taking it. I suggested bringing our own soap but that’s not very convenient. I also asked my boss to put a soap dispenser on the wall so no one can take it, but he said no.
This week, about half of our team got a stomach virus and I think... the reason is simple - people aren’t washing their hands.
How can we fix this problem? How is it done at your workplace? Thanks!

 more
1   

  • Leah Umeokeke

    10h

    In addition to all the previous great suggestions, Install a CCTV camera at every wash basin to dissuade people from leaving with the soap.

    1

  • Hellen Kasyoka

    11h

    First thing have the soap dispenser mounted at every wash basin ,have a sanitizer also mounted at strategic places then assign a cleaner... responsibility of refilling more

Load more...

Anonymous member


Career development 20h
please i need a guide on how to prepare for a live recruitment assessment that would last for 30 minutes, any suggestions please?
1   

Career development

 14h

Part-Time Job Search Support - 21/03/2026 00:18 EDT


I'm ready to move into a reliable part-time position and would like an experienced recruitment or career-coaching professional to guide me from start to finish. That includes sharpening my résumé, optimising my online profiles, scouting roles that fit my background, and preparing me to interview with confidence. I'm open to opportunities across administrative, technical or creative areas, so feel... free to suggest openings where my transferable skills can add value. Here's what I need from you: * A fully polished résumé and brief cover-letter template tailored for part-time applications * A curated list of at least ten suitable part-time vacancies with direct application links * Practical interview prep sessions -- question drills, feedback and confidence-building tips I'll share my current CV and availability as soon as we begin, and I'm happy to collaborate through video calls, chat or shared documents -- whatever keeps us both on track. If you have a proven track record placing candidates in part-time roles, let's connect and get my next opportunity locked in. more

Career development

 18h

Virtual Assistant Needed to Apply for Jobs Daily (Tech Roles)


Each day I need 30-50 targeted applications sent out on my behalf and recorded neatly in a shared Google Sheet. The priority is company career sites rather than public boards, so you will spend most of your time on the internal portals of tech, finance, and healthcare organisations that match my résumé and stated preferences. Your routine will look like this: * Search approved company portals for... fresh openings that align with my background. * Adjust the résumé or cover-letter template just enough to reflect each posting's keywords or unique requirements. * Submit the application, double-checking every field for accuracy and compliance with site rules (no bots or grey-area automation). * Log the role title, link, salary range if listed, date applied, and any follow-up steps in the tracker. I will provide: - Current résumé, multiple cover-letter templates, and a quick-reference sheet of my target roles, skills, and location preferences. - Access to the Google Sheet tracker and a short Loom walkthrough of the exact process I want followed. You should already feel comfortable writing concise, mistake-free English, following granular instructions, and working with LinkedIn-style application forms, but the real key is accuracy: every field completed, every attachment correct, every entry recorded. Prior experience in recruiting or high-volume job searching will help you move quickly without cutting corners. This is long-term, part-time work that repeats daily. Let me know about any similar projects you've handled, the average number of applications you managed per day, and the tools you used to stay organised. Reliable, instruction-driven support is exactly what I'm after; if that sounds like you, I'm ready to get started. more

Career development

 19h

The Benefits of Graduating Magna Cum Laude for Your Career Success


Many students and parents wonder, "Is magna cum laude good for career success?" Achieving magna cum laude honors is traditionally associated with academic excellence, representing a significant accomplishment during one's higher education journey. But how does this accolade translate to career benefits post-graduation? In this article, we explore the advantages of graduating magna cum laude and... how this distinction can impact your professional life.

Is Magna Cum Laude Good for Career Prospects?

Graduating with magna cum laude honors signifies that a student has achieved a high level of academic excellence. Employers often regard such honors as indicative of a candidate's ability to perform at a high intellectual level, demonstrating dedication, discipline, and competence. It's important to understand how this prestige might advantage you in a competitive job market and assist in your career development.

Understanding Academic Honors

In academia, honors such as summa cum laude, magna cum laude, and cum laude are used to distinguish the academic performance of graduates. These Latin honors translate to "with highest honor," "with great honor," and "with honor" respectively. Magna cum laude typically requires a GPA between that of cum laude and summa cum laude, though exact criteria can vary by institution.

Career Advancement Opportunities

Graduating magna cum laude is often seen favorably by prospective employers, especially within highly competitive fields such as law, medicine, or academia. Employers may interpret this achievement as a sign of an applicant's potential, commitment, and perseverance. These traits are highly valued in the professional landscape.

Boosting Your Resume

Your resume is often the first impression you make in the job market. Including magna cum laude in your academic achievements can differentiate your application from others. It's demonstrative of your capability to achieve and maintain high standards, which can be an attractive trait to potential employers.

Networking Benefits

Beyond the immediate advantages of job searching, graduating magna cum laude can also enhance networking opportunities. Alumni networks and industry connections value such distinctions, providing a platform to discuss shared experiences and gain insights from established professionals.

Scholarships and Graduate School

Those considering further education may find that magna cum laude honors make them more competitive for scholarships and graduate school admissions. Academic institutions often favor candidates with outstanding academic records, viewing them as assets to their programs.

If you plan to seek recommendations for graduate studies, consider leveraging tools and tips from our comprehensive guide on letters of recommendation.

Considerations and Limitations

While magna cum laude can be advantageous, it is also crucial to consider the whole profile of job applicants. Employers often prioritize skills, experience, cultural fit, and other professional qualities. It is equally important to develop a well-rounded portfolio that complements your academic achievements.

The Psychological Impact

Graduating with honors can boost confidence, demonstrating to yourself and others that you are capable of achieving set goals. This sense of self-efficacy can propel you toward taking on new challenges and responsibilities in your professional journey.

Final Thoughts: Is Magna Cum Laude Good?

So, is magna cum laude good for career success? While it's not a guaranteed ticket to success, it certainly strengthens your positioning in many ways. Emphasizing academic honors can enhance job prospects and professional growth opportunities, making it a worthwhile pursuit.

* Magna cum laude is a prestigious academic honor.

* It can positively impact your job prospects.

* Honors can enhance your resume and networking opportunities.

* Consider all career aspects, not just academics.

* Your success also depends on a well-rounded skill set.

FAQ

What GPA is typically required for magna cum laude?

The GPA requirement for magna cum laude often varies by institution but generally falls between 3.7 to 3.9 on a 4.0 scale.

Does magna cum laude offer more opportunities in certain fields?

Yes, fields such as law, academia, and certain sectors in finance and technology often place a higher value on academic honors.

How should I note magna cum laude on my resume?

Include magna cum laude under the education section of your resume, often right below your degree and your institution's name.

Are Latin honors the same worldwide?

Latin honors systems are mainly used in the United States and some parts of Europe. Other countries might have different systems to denote academic excellence.

Where can I learn more about academic honors?

Further information on academic honors can be found in educational resources like Wikipedia's page on education. more

Career development

 21h

Worker's Advice About What Bosses Actually Look For In A Job Interview Goes Against Everything You Would Expect


A worker went viral for their take on what bosses actually look for in a job interview, and it is the opposite of what we have been taught. Instead of focusing on who you are and what you know, you need to focus on what your potential boss wants to hear.

So much of the advice we get about job interviews often centers on how we can "bring our true self to the workplace" and other such tips. But as... this worker argued, that's malarkey. An interview is all about saying what the hiring person wants to hear. Any advice to the contrary is probably just telling you what you want to hear.

If you've been in the working world for any amount of time, you've likely heard all the gurus' advice. Craft a narrative, prove you're a cultural fit, show them you have a vision for the future, show them who you are as a person, blah blah blah blah blah.

fizkes | Shutterstock

Sure, that all sounds great. But as so many people like to say nowadays, from workers to the few HR professionals willing to be honest: In our era of so little loyalty and so many layoffs, the real truth is that your job does not care about you.

So what DO employers actually want when you come in for an interview? A worker took to Tumblr with an answer, and it's the kind of blunt, hard truth that seems harsh on its face, but actually makes the whole thing a lot simpler.

RELATED: Boss Refuses To Hire Any New Employees Who Admit To Doing This Very Normal Thing Outside Of Work Hours

"Remember that interviews are not about giving a good and honest first impression that they'll carefully consider," the worker wrote. "Interviews are about saying the special words and phrases they're looking for that give you points and when they tally those up whoever earned the most job points wins."

That may sound too simple, and too cynical by half. But what I've learned in my own working life is that this person, whoever they are, is absolutely correct. Employers truly don't care about who you are as a person, at least not at first.

They may grow to care one day. And they'll certainly say they care to lure you in and give the appearance of a touchy-feely corporate culture! But they do not actually care about your grand goals, what you've had to overcome, and what you hope to achieve.

The worker went on to say, "They don't want to 'know you' they want you to walk in there and regurgitate everything the job description said." Yep... that sounds about right!

RELATED: Boss Uses 'Salt & Pepper Test' In Every Job Interview And Avoids Hiring Candidates Who Fail

So what do actual experts say about this? Well, they're a bit more nuanced about it, but a lot of them basically say the same thing.

Anna Papalia is a veteran recruiter and career coach who is an expert on job interviewing. Her advice: Do not ever share anything personal in a job interview.

Aside from everything else, you talking about how much you love being a mother, for instance, is a great way to trigger an employer's sexist biases.

Is that fair, or for that matter, legal? Of course not. But it's also the reality. Papalia suggested instead that you keep everything you say in an interview grounded in your qualifications for the job. Leave the rest of you at home.

Bonnie Dilber, another recruiter and job search expert, took things even further. She said to outright lie in your interviews about certain personal details, like future plans, why you want the job, and why you're leaving the one you're coming from. Her advice: Tell the interviewer what they want to hear, not the truth.

Recruiter Joel Lalgee went so far as to say that being honest in the workplace is the biggest mistake he's made in his career. "Corporations want 'yes men,'" a worker said in response to one of his videos, to which he replied emphatically, "Yesssss."

For a lot of creative types, who often operate from the heart rather than the head, and neurodivergent people who often struggle with subtext, this cynical approach has probably never occurred to them. Many said as much in a Facebook post where 3000s' hot take was shared. "I'm annoyed," one person commented, "but I suppose it makes sense."

Of course, a bit of charisma never hurts any endeavor. You don't have to become a robot. And having a background on the company and the person you're interviewing with is always vital. But as for all that other job interview prep? Ultimately, work is about getting the job done, with as little friction as possible, while making as much money as possible.

So, keeping it simple by telling them whatever they want to hear doesn't sound like a bad idea. And it'll save a lot of headaches.

RELATED: CEO Refuses To Hire Job Candidates Who Have This Particular Response To Common Interview Question more

Career development

 21h

Britt Prince at the inflection point: what Nebraska's bubble season means for the NCAA Tournament ahead


britt prince sits at the center of Nebraska women's basketball's most important tension right now: the team can be framed as either safely in the NCAA Tournament conversation or uncomfortably close to the cut line, depending on how the bubble breaks.

What happens when britt prince becomes the hinge of a bubble-case team?

The immediate inflection point is not a single play or a single opponent;... it is the reality that Nebraska's NCAA Tournament case has been described as debatable, with the added pressure that one or two additional wins by another bubble team could have changed the picture. That dynamic forces every late-game possession, every closing lineup, and every response after a setback to matter more than it would for a team with a clearly secure résumé.

In the current frame, britt prince is listed among Nebraska players present late in a game that ended in an Iowa win at Pinnacle Bank Arena. That detail matters because it places britt prince in the moments when outcomes are being decided and when coaching staffs tend to narrow rotations, leaning on the players they trust to execute under stress.

What if the current state of play stays this tight for Nebraska?

Nebraska's recent snapshot comes from a home game against Iowa at Pinnacle Bank Arena that ended with Iowa winning. The scene description places Nebraska head coach Amy Williams reacting after calling a timeout, and it shows multiple Nebraska players on the floor and watching late, including Logan Nissley and Alanna Neale alongside britt prince. The simplest reading is also the most consequential: Nebraska is operating in a context where losses like this can amplify scrutiny, because the broader tournament case has already been characterized as one that could be challenged.

That makes the current state less about a single opponent and more about positioning: Nebraska is the kind of team that can end up needing results to hold, rather than simply needing performances to improve. The bubble framing also implies that external outcomes -- other teams' win totals -- can change Nebraska's comfort level without Nebraska playing a game that day.

What if the forces shaping the next outcome are mostly psychological and rotational?

The available signals point to three forces that tend to reshape bubble-team trajectories, even when hard statistical detail is not in view:

The takeaway is not that any one player can single-handedly solve a season's résumé question, but that the players who are on the floor at the end -- including britt prince -- often become the public face of how a team handles the defining minutes of a bubble year.

What if three NCAA Tournament futures open up from here?

Best-case: Nebraska turns the debate about whether the team has "done enough" into a settled argument by stringing together results that remove ambiguity. In this path, late-game minutes stop being framed as auditions and start being framed as proof points, with britt prince consistently in the trusted group at the end of halves and games.

Most likely: Nebraska remains in a reality where results and résumé framing are both in play. The team's NCAA Tournament status continues to feel conditional, not because of a single weakness identified here, but because bubble seasons tend to be defined by narrow margins and by what peer teams do on the same line.

Most challenging: The bubble compresses further, and the premise that Nebraska's case might not have been enough becomes more central. In that scenario, the pressure on closing units intensifies and late-game lineups -- including britt prince's role in those lineups -- receive outsized attention because the stakes feel binary.

What happens next for the people and groups most affected?

Who wins: Players trusted in closing moments benefit from clarity of role and high-leverage opportunities; britt prince stands to be most visibly associated with any push that stabilizes Nebraska's NCAA Tournament position. Coaches benefit when the team's outcomes align with the season narrative they are trying to build and defend.

Who loses: Any team living on the edge of the bubble loses control over its own story, because even a strong internal case can be made fragile by outside win totals. The broader roster can also feel the squeeze of shorter rotations when coaching staffs concentrate minutes in late-game situations.

Uncertainty remains real and should be acknowledged plainly: the context here establishes that Nebraska's case has been questioned and that external outcomes could matter, but it does not provide a complete résumé picture or a full set of performance indicators. What is visible is the pressure environment -- and the identity of who is on the floor when that pressure peaks.

Nebraska's immediate task is to convert a debatable profile into a self-evident one, and the spotlight will naturally follow the players most associated with closing minutes and visible late-game roles, including britt prince more

Career development

 1d

When Everything Looks Perfect & Isn't: Redefining Career Readiness in the AI Era


Date & Time: Tuesday, April 28, 2026 at 2 p.m. ET

For the first time in history, AI can generate the perfect résumé, paper, cover letter, interview response, etc. But despite investments in college and career pathways, districts still face a readiness gap. Employers continue to cite concerns about adaptability, communication, judgment, and real-world experience.

In this 30-minute Ed Talk,... participants will rethink what readiness means in an era where perfection is easily produced as we ask ourselves the question: "If everything can be polished, optimized, and automated, what actually differentiates a student?"

Bonus: Attendees who join the live event will be able to participate in a ThoughtExchange workshop to share and rank career readiness best practices from their peers.***

Key Takeaways

* Rethinking Résumés and Interviews: Why résumé writing and interview prep are no longer sufficient signals of readiness

* AI's Impact on Readiness: How AI reshapes assessment, authenticity, and differentiation

* Differentiate Your Students: What educators can prioritize to build identity, adaptability, and durable skills

* More Than Academics: Why performance-based experiences and real-world proof points matter more than ever

* Pathway to Careers: How exploration, skill-building, and credentialing can work together as a connected pathway

* ***Live 5-minute Workshop: Audience participation will generate reports showing the common ground and differences among district leaders, the summary of highest and lowest rated best practices, the top themes, potential next steps, and a SWOT analysis

In a world where AI can perfect the presentation, schools must focus on what technology cannot replicate: purpose, judgment, resilience, collaboration, and lived experience.

Speaker

Andrew Dunaway, Director of Career-Connected Learning, Pearson more

Career development

 1d

Job-seekers aren't imagining things: the number of candidates getting ghosted by employers just reached a three-year high | Fortune


Job seekers are up against a brutal labor market, sending thousands of applications out to no avail, and resorting to in-person stunts to get an employer's attention. And a new report is confirming their suspicions: hiring managers are ghosting their candidates, and it's getting worse for talent every year.

More than half, 53%, of job seekers experienced ghosting within the last year, according... to a new report from pre-employment testing company Criteria. And that number just reached a three-year peak, as 48% of applicants were ignored by employers in 2025, and 38% were ghosted in 2024.

Job seekers may point the finger at lethargic hiring managers, but in actuality, the worrying trend might chalk up to an overwhelming hiring process "increasingly ineffective" at finding the right match.

"We're seeing a surge in application volume, largely fueled by AI tools that make it easier than ever to apply and tailor résumés at scale," Josh Millet, the cofounder and CEO of Criteria, tells Fortune. "The result is that hiring teams are spending more time reviewing applications, but getting less meaningful signals from each one."

And as job seekers and hiring managers both increasingly use advanced technology, it's muddying the best way to pick talent. Millet explained that the résumé, once the benchmark of a job application, is now becoming a "weaker signal" because it can be easily generated by AI. As more people highly tailor their résumé with AI tools, it then becomes harder to differentiate the frontrunner in a pool of polished applications. As a result, employers aren't always answering back to the thousands of candidates who applied to an open role within the span of just hours.

"Recruiters are inundated, screening methods are less reliable, and communication suffers," Millet continued. "In many ways, ghosting is less about intent and more about a hiring process that hasn't caught up to how candidates are applying today."

AI has undoubtedly upended the hiring process and turned it into a numbers game; job-seekers send out a deluge of applications until something sticks, while managers are stuck sifting through thousands of candidates for every open role. The trend has been intensifying for years, leaving many job-hunters out in the cold -- and sometimes, employers are intentionally ghosting.

About 81% of recruiters said that their employer posts "ghost jobs," or roles that either don't exist or have already been filled, according to a 2024 report from MyPerfectResume.

Unlike conventional ghosting, these fake postings are created for a purposeful reason: about 38% of recruiters reported that they post fake positions to maintain a presence on job boards when they aren't hiring, 36% did so to assess the effectiveness of their job postings, and 26% hoped gain insight into the job market and competitors.

Jasmine Escalera, a career expert for MyPerfectResume, told Fortune in 2024 that another big reason is wanting to improve their employers' image; nearly a quarter said that fake jobs help their company look like they're not freezing hiring, and one fifth fessed up to posting ghost jobs to improve the reputation of their business.

"Companies are trying to project 'We're okay, we're still maintaining hiring, that we're still moving in a growth-oriented trend. In this market, our organization is doing well.' That ties into why these fake jobs might be appearing more from a comforting perspective," Escalera explained. "It really is about the business, the bottom line, showing growth, showing trends, and how that can connect to maintaining profit."

But the trend is discouraging for candidates vying to land a new role.

"We often hear job-seekers saying, 'I'm tired, I'm depressed, I'm desperate,' using these very harsh words when it comes to the job market," the career expert continued. "This is one of the reasons why they are losing faith in organizations and companies." more

Career development

 1d

Here is the new smart


I've spent years in the training world, watching change sweep through not just business, but people, too. Trainers, speakers and educators like me used to train for stability. Now, we train for turbulence.

PowerPoint was once the future. Now, if your slides don't move, people wonder if your thinking does. If your presentation stands still, some assume your career will too.

I've watched job... titles vanish, industries reinvent themselves and skills that once impressed become just résumé decorations.

Remember when "knows how to use a fax machine" was a flex?

I've seen people who once feared change now teaching others how to handle it.

The tools changed.

The pace changed.

Expectations changed.

Even attention spans changed.

These days, if you can't explain your idea in 30 seconds, people assume you don't have one.

I wasn't born curious or adaptable. I built it, day by day. It took years of practice to meet change with excitement instead of fear.

Adaptability is a muscle. Use it, and it grows.

One thing never changes: the curious, humble and adaptable keep growing. The rest get stuck in the "good old days." Those days were only good because we didn't know what was coming.

Some ride the wave and find new doors opening. Others stand on the shore, hoping the tide will turn back.

It won't.

The ocean doesn't care about nostalgia.

Not long ago, millennials were the new kids, and Gen Z was just starting college. People worried these groups were too fragile. One wrong word could spark outrage. Comedians got backlash for jokes. Celebrities lost deals over a single post.

It became a world where one mistake could cost you big.

In business, this sensitivity led to new HR rules and wellness programs.

Then the pandemic hit, and suddenly everyone was talking about resilience and adaptability.

Priorities shifted.

First, it was all about IQ.

Then EQ became the buzzword.

Now, the game has changed again.

AI and automation are moving faster than job titles can keep up. IQ and EQ still matter, but adaptability is the real edge now.

The big question:

How fast can you adjust when things shift?

The Agility Quotient (AQ) is the new must-have.

Skills get old fast. But you can future-proof yourself by building your AQ.

Stay curious.

Look for ways to add value.

Solve problems before they become roadblocks.

This mindset isn't just for entrepreneurs. It's for anyone who wants to make a difference.

Entrepreneurial thinkers see problems as opportunities. They take ownership. They look for ways to improve, not just check off tasks.

For them, learning is an investment, not a chore.

Most people ask:

"What's my job?"

People with high AQ ask:

"What problem can I solve?"

"How can I make this better?"

This shift changes how you show up in meetings, projects and leadership.

Increasingly, clients want training in AQ and Change Management.

Agility isn't a one-time skill. It's a habit.

You build it by solving problems, taking action and learning every day.

New skills, honest feedback, long-term growth and working with proactive people all help you get there.

This mindset doesn't just change people. It changes organizations.

Satya Nadella turned Microsoft from a know-it-all culture into a learn-it-all culture.[1] That's how they took the lead in cloud and AI.

The real advantage?

Adaptability.

The pattern is clear.

It's not a lack of intelligence that holds people back. It's a lack of adaptability.

Careers stall when people stop learning, unlearning and relearning.

In the age of AI, overconfidence is a trap.

Adaptability isn't optional.

The future will test us. Those who learn fast, adapt early and keep improving will win.

Fragility won't help you grow. Life is tough. The world isn't always fair.

Complaining won't move you forward.

Agility gives you options. It lets you adjust when plans change, pivot when opportunities shift and keep moving when others freeze.

Hard times will come, but adaptable people find a way through.

Yes.

Adaptability is the new smart.

I remind myself not to wish for an easier world. I train for a tougher one.

The future won't be kind to the rigid, but it will always make room for those willing to learn, bend and grow.

The adaptable don't just survive the future.

They thrive.

They shape it.

(Join and subscribe to Kongversations, the YouTube podcast that reached 10,000 subscribers in just its first 6 months. You can also catch the podcast "Inspiring Excellence" on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts and other major platforms).

The 5th Face of Innovation: The Collaborator Innovator https://productleadersdayindia.org/blogs/the-collaborator-innovator.html more

Career development

 1d

AI Boundaries: Why We Must Draw the Line Before It's Too Late


Hey there, fellow digital explorers. If you've been following the AI hype for the last few years, you've probably felt that familiar mix of excitement and unease. One minute ChatGPT is writing your emails better than you ever could; the next, you're reading headlines about deepfake scandals, biased hiring algorithms, or AI chatbots giving dangerously wrong medical advice. That creeping feeling?... It's the realization that artificial intelligence is growing up fast -- and nobody quite agreed on the house rules.

I'm not here to fear-monger. I've spent countless late nights geeking out over Grok, Claude, and the latest models, watching them get scarily good at everything from coding to creative writing. But the more I use them, the more I'm convinced: AI without boundaries isn't progress -- it's a ticking time bomb.

Let's start with the obvious. AI doesn't "think" like us. It predicts patterns from mountains of data, and those patterns include every ugly bias humans have ever typed online. Remember the early image generators that only produced white CEOs when asked for "successful business leaders"? Or recruitment tools that quietly downgraded résumés with women's names? Those weren't glitches -- they were reflections of training data left unchecked. Without firm ethical guardrails, AI doesn't just mirror society; it amplifies the worst parts at lightning speed.

Then there's the privacy nightmare. Every time you paste your personal life into an AI prompt, you're feeding the beast. Companies swear data is anonymized, yet we've already seen leaks, model inversions, and "memorization" attacks where sensitive information gets spat back out. Europe's AI Act and California's new privacy bills are trying to draw lines here, but most of the world is still playing catch-up. If we treat AI like a magical free oracle instead of a data-hungry teenager, we're basically handing over our digital souls with a smile.

And don't get me started on the "creative" side. I love asking AI to brainstorm blog ideas or polish my drafts (guilty as charged). But when students submit AI-written essays that sound more human than their actual writing, or artists watch their exact style cloned without permission, something fundamental breaks. Creativity isn't just output -- it's the messy, painful, deeply personal process behind it. When AI removes the struggle, it also cheapens the victory. We're already seeing lawsuits from writers and illustrators who feel their life's work has been vacuumed up into training sets without consent. Boundaries aren't anti-progress; they're what keep art human.

On a darker note, consider autonomous weapons. Several countries are racing to deploy AI that decides who lives and dies on the battlefield. The same tech that helps your phone suggest the fastest route home could, in another context, select targets with zero human oversight. Scientists and ethicists have been begging for international treaties to ban "killer robots" for years, yet development quietly continues. This isn't sci-fi anymore -- it's happening in labs right now. If we don't set hard red lines (no lethal decisions without meaningful human judgment), we risk sleepwalking into a future where wars become faster, cheaper, and far more deadly.

So what should those boundaries actually look like? I'm not calling for a full halt -- innovation has already solved problems I never imagined possible. Instead, we need smart, enforceable lines:

Transparency first. Every AI system above a certain capability level should be required to disclose when it's operating and what data it was trained on. Watermarking generated content (images, video, text) needs to become standard, not optional.

Human-in-the-loop for high-stakes decisions. Hiring, loans, medical diagnoses, criminal sentencing -- none of these should be final without real human review. AI can advise; it shouldn't rule.

Clear ownership rules. If your style, voice, or likeness is used to train a model, you deserve a say -- and compensation if it's commercial. The EU is moving this direction; the rest of us should follow fast.

Personal boundaries matter too. On an individual level, we have to stop treating AI like an all-knowing friend. I've started asking myself before every prompt: "Would I ask a stranger this?" or "Am I outsourcing something I should learn myself?" Small habits like that keep us in the driver's seat.

The beautiful irony? The very companies racing to build more powerful AI are also the ones quietly adding their own internal boundaries. OpenAI, Anthropic, and xAI all have safety teams, red-teaming processes, and "refusal" mechanisms for dangerous requests. They know unchecked power is dangerous. The question is whether governments and society will catch up before the next big leap -- maybe AGI itself -- makes today's concerns look quaint.

I'm optimistic, honestly. Humans have a long track record of inventing powerful tools and then learning (sometimes the hard way) how to live with them. Fire, electricity, nuclear energy -- we drew boundaries, not because we hated progress, but because we loved humanity more. AI deserves the same thoughtful restraint.

So next time you fire up your favorite model, pause for a second. Ask yourself: Am I using this tool, or is it quietly reshaping me? The boundaries we set today -- technical, legal, personal, and ethical -- will decide whether AI remains the most incredible assistant we've ever built... or becomes the first technology that truly outgrew its creators. What boundaries would you draw? Drop your thoughts in the comments. Let's keep this conversation going while we still can.

AI, technology, and digital future insights from India for the world. Exploring language barriers, cultural and opportunities in the global digital economy more

Anonymous member


Career development 1d
Hello .I am recent graduate in project management ,I also have a background in data analytics using QuickBooks,STATA and SPSS and have been a leader at a chistian union for a year.Getting a job has been quite difficult.Kindly can someone give me any recommendations on any job needed that fits this skills.Your will be very much appreciated.

Career development

 1d

I've applied to over 500 jobs in the 11 months since my layoff. I lost hot water and started a GoFundMe.


She said the search has taken a financial toll on her family, and she had to start a GoFundMe campaign.

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Valerie Lockhart, a job seeker in her 40s based in Georgia. She was previously a vice president at Morgan Stanley until she was laid off last year. The following has been edited for length and clarity.

One day last March, I was working from... the office when I was asked to have a meeting with my manager's boss.

It didn't feel out of the ordinary at first because I'd met with them before, and our last meeting had been canceled, so I assumed we were just making it up. But when I walked into the conference room and saw an HR representative sitting there, I realized something was wrong.

I learned I was being laid off, and later found out many others were, too -- including several people I knew personally.

This set me on an ongoing search for a stable, full-time role -- one that has been deeply discouraging and has significantly strained my finances.

The layoff came as a complete surprise, and I don't know exactly why I was selected. However, I think being based in Georgia may have worked against me. My manager at Morgan Stanley was in New York, along with many of my colleagues and the company's leadership, so there weren't many people who saw my contributions in person. I think the distance may have also created some communication challenges.

While I was laid off in March, I appreciated that I was kept on the payroll through May, which meant I still had healthcare coverage. I also received one month of severance. It wasn't much since it was based on my tenure with the company, and I had only started there in late 2023.

The extra months gave me a little time to process everything instead of immediately diving into a job search. By mid-April, though, I was actively looking for work -- and I've been searching ever since.

Before I started submitting applications, I updated my LinkedIn and analyzed my résumé to make sure the ATS systems that screen résumés these days would actually read it.

Then I started applying to roles online and reaching out to my network about opportunities, with a focus on governance, risk, and compliance roles at larger companies.

I consider myself fairly organized, so I created a spreadsheet to track every job I've applied to. By November, I had applied to more than 550 jobs. The hundreds of roles I applied for weren't random applications. They were positions I carefully selected.

Out of those, I heard back -- beyond a basic "no thank you" email -- from about 25 of them.

I made it to the final round multiple times, but none of those interviews led to an offer. At the last stage, something always seems to flip, and it doesn't work out.

My job search has had a significant impact on my finances, as I'm the primary earner for my family -- my spouse, my son, and me. We've relied on general savings, retirement accounts, and unemployment benefits. It's affected every aspect of our financial life.

Paying our mortgage has been the biggest challenge. We've tried to cut back wherever we can, including canceling some entertainment services. Every bit of savings helps, but it doesn't change the reality that housing is expensive.

Unexpected expenses have only made things harder. One day last September, we came home to find the right side of our garage -- where we stored some valuable items -- flooded. There were thousands of dollars' worth of damaged property.

We later learned that a pipe leak under the house was to blame. While our home insurance would help cover some of the damage, we were responsible for thousands of dollars in plumbing repairs. Paying that bill would've meant using money we needed to stay afloat and put food on the table.

So we delayed the repair, knowing that until it was fixed, we wouldn't have hot water. It felt like our own "Little House on the Prairie" moment.

To try to raise money for the repair, we started a GoFundMe campaign that, after some hesitation, I shared on LinkedIn. We raised a few hundred dollars, but it wasn't enough to cover the full cost.

Eventually, I had a bit of luck. In January 2026 -- about seven months after I began looking for work -- I started a temporary, full-time contract role. I was finally able to save enough money to repair the hot water.

Because the position is temporary, I haven't stopped looking for work.

While my connections have helped me land some interviews, I've had to broaden my search beyond the companies where I have strong ties. At times, it feels like I'm either underqualified or overqualified for the roles I apply to. Some companies seem to be looking for unicorn candidates and would rather leave positions empty than hire someone.

I'm still applying and hoping something works out. At this point, I just need one opportunity. more

William Robinson


Career development 1w
I had a job interview at a small company. The director said he was going to lunch and asked me to go with him. He bought me a coffee, we talked calmly and then he said I got the job and could start on Monday. I still don’t understand what the catch is. Or did I really just get lucky and find a job that easily?

9   

  • Renate Fester

    1d

    While there is nothing inherently wrong with this approach, it is nonetheless unconventional. That said, though, it might be worth asking the question... for purposes of context and clarity. Knowing what went right in an interview is as important as knowing what went wrong. Typically, and I'll say this again, interviews are generally used to determine culture fit and are used less to determine expertise. Expertise is usually determined by the CV, so when a candidate gets to the interview stage, the company already knows they have the knowledge and skills to do the job. The interview decides whether you will fit in. So if you really want to know, book a meeting with him and ask. more

  • Tree Moon

    1d

    I would love a job interview like that! The best are when you are hired on the spot when you just walk in with your Rez.

    1
Load more...

Career development

 1d

8 Common HR Tasks Made Easier With HR Automation


You're juggling paperwork, systems, and people issues while trying to keep the business moving. That's where HR automation steps in, quietly reshaping how teams operate and freeing you to focus on what really matters.

Below, you'll see how automation takes some of the most common tasks and makes them smoother, faster, and far less stressful -- without losing the human touch.

Teams manage... numerous repetitive admin tasks that are tied to essential HR processes. Updating employee records, handling approval processes, and maintaining accurate employee data can quickly overwhelm even experienced HR personnel. Manual work also increases the risk of errors, especially when information is scattered across emails and spreadsheets.

This is why specialised solutions, including HR software for small UK firms, should become a core component of your organization's digital transformation. Modern HR systems replace fragmented tools and ageing legacy systems with unified platforms.

With HR process automation, everyday business processes become more reliable. Tasks that once took hours now happen in the background, without disrupting how your organization works.

Annual reviews alone rarely support modern work patterns; that's why companies must keep up. Many organisations now embrace ongoing performance tracking, regular feedback, and clear links to career development to encourage employee satisfaction. But doing this manually across teams is time-consuming.

Digitising processes enables consistent performance management, from everyday check-ins to formal performance appraisal cycles. A goal setting software helps employees understand expectations, track progress, and stay motivated -- without creating extra admin load for HR. Moreover, with integrated tools, you can align feedback with talent development goals and provide clearer paths for growth.

Recruitment is about more than filling roles. It's about shaping a strong candidate experience from the first click to the first day. Yet many teams struggle to manage CVs, interviews, and feedback efficiently, even with applicant tracking systems in place.

Automation supports recruiting & talent acquisition by streamlining shortlisting, scheduling, and communication. HR automation tools with artificial intelligence, machine learning, and natural language processing integrations ensure no candidate slips through the cracks and help surface the best-fit applicants faster. This saves time and builds trust with candidates who feel informed and respected throughout the process.

The early weeks of a new hire's journey strongly influence long-term employee retention. In most organizations, though, onboarding is often inconsistent, particularly across multiple locations or time zones. Documents get missed. Training is delayed. New starters feel lost.

Automated workflows create a structured yet flexible onboarding experience. A central learning management system (LMS), which is a software for delivering training and compliance materials, can deliver policies, training modules, and compliance tasks automatically. Combined with employee self-service (ESS) portals -- web tools letting staff manage their information -- new hires can access information when they need it, improving both confidence and the wider employee experience.

Few tasks carry more risk than payroll processing and benefits administration. Mistakes can damage trust and expose you to legal trouble. Add regulatory requirements, changing tax rules, and benefits enrolment, and the pressure increases.

Automation supports benefit and payroll administration through tools like payroll orchestration (software that streamlines payroll tasks), tax software, and compliance reporting software. These systems handle calculations, deadlines, and compliance checks automatically, reducing errors while protecting sensitive HR data. Strong data privacy regulations, role-based access controls (setting specific system permissions by job role), and a robust security solution help ensure employee trust remains intact.

Employees increasingly expect quick answers and control over their own information. Without automation, HR teams can become bottlenecks, answering the same questions repeatedly and chasing forms.

Digital tools improve employee engagement through responsive employee-centric programs and intuitive ESS portals. Staff can update details, request leave, or check benefits without delay. At the same time, HR workflow automation ensures requests flow correctly behind the scenes.

Ensuring a helpful and personal approach is particularly valuable during employee onboarding for remote teams. New hires can be guided through clear, step-by-step processes that introduce them to company culture, expectations, and colleagues without relying on ad-hoc emails or last-minute calls. When onboarding feels organised and welcoming, employees are more likely to settle in quickly and stay engaged for the long term.

Advanced tools also help create structure around communication, feedback, and development, ensuring no one is overlooked. Scheduled check-ins, pulse surveys, and learning prompts can all be triggered automatically, giving HR better visibility into how people are coping and where extra support may be needed.

The shift towards hybrid and flexible working has changed what employees expect from HR. People want consistency, fairness, and easy access to support, whether they're in the office, at home, or splitting their time between the two. Without the right systems, this quickly becomes difficult to manage and can create frustration on all sides.

With technology, HR teams play a crucial role in successful hybrid work arrangements by ensuring everyone operates from the same playbook. Automated workflows, shared dashboards, and centralised policies give employees equal access to information, regardless of where they work. HR can monitor patterns, spot issues early, and support managers with real-time data rather than guesswork.

Finally, automation isn't just about saving time but about making smart decisions. Centralised HR technology turns everyday activity into data-driven insights that help improve how your organisation functions. Trends in absence, performance, or engagement become visible, helping you act early.

When used well, it gives HR professionals the space to think strategically, support people properly, and contribute meaningfully to business growth.

HR automation doesn't remove the human element; it protects it. By streamlining admin, improving accuracy, and enhancing the employee journey, you create space for empathy, strategy, and growth. In a fast-changing UK workplace, automation isn't a luxury. It's a practical way to make HR work better for everyone. more