Hardening of Attitudes

Arctic Wolf’s 2025 Human Risk Behaviour Snapshot reveals that 77 per cent of IT and security leaders say they have (or would) sack an employee for falling for a phishing or social engineering scam, up from 66 per cent in 2024. The report describes this shockingly high statistic as the result of a significant hardening of attitudes among security professionals, despite continuing increases in attack volume and breach rates.

The Scale

The study, which surveyed more than 1,700 IT leaders and end users globally, found that 68 per cent of organisations suffered at least one breach in the past year. The UK and Ireland, for example, recorded some of the steepest rises, partly due to high-profile incidents in the retail sector. Arctic Wolf notes that many firms are still failing to implement basic measures, with only 54 per cent enforcing multi-factor authentication (MFA) for all users.

Sacking Doesn’t Solve The Problem

The same report also found that organisations taking an education-first approach rather than firing staff saw an 88 per cent reduction in long-term human risk. According to Arctic Wolf’s Chief Information Security Officer, Adam Marrè, “Terminating employees for falling victim to a phishing attack may feel like a quick fix, but it doesn’t solve the underlying problem.”

A Strong Policy Signal

The findings of the report appear to highlight a growing gap between confidence and capability. For example, three-quarters of leaders said they believed their organisation would not fall for a phishing attack, yet almost two-thirds admitted they have clicked a phishing link themselves, and one in five said they failed to report it.

Corrective Action Instead of Dismissal

It should be noted that, in the same survey, more than six in ten leaders said they had taken corrective action against employees who fell for phishing scams by restricting or changing access privileges, which Arctic Wolf suggests is a more constructive approach than dismissal.

Executives Are Valuable Targets For Cybercriminals

In fact, the company’s own data also shows that 39 per cent of senior leadership teams were targeted by phishing and 35 per cent experienced malware infections, highlighting how executives themselves are often the most valuable targets for attackers.

“When leaders are overconfident in their defences while overlooking how employees actually use technology, it creates the perfect conditions for mistakes to become breaches,” Marrè said. He added that the most secure organisations “pair strong policies and safeguards with a culture that empowers employees to speak up, learn from errors, and continuously improve.”

Confidence Vs Behaviour

The Arctic Wolf report appears to highlight a clear contradiction. For example, while most security leaders view phishing as a frontline employee issue, they are actually statistically among the most likely to make the same mistakes. Many also admit to disabling or bypassing security systems. For example, 51 per cent said they had done so in the past year, often claiming that certain measures “slowed them down” or made their work harder.

This gap between stated policy and personal practice is what Marrè describes as “a major blind spot and degree of hubris among some security leaders.” The report concludes that leadership culture sets the tone for the rest of the organisation, and that inconsistency at the top erodes credibility and weakens defences.

Who Is Really Falling For Phishing In 2025?

The question of who gets caught out most is not as simple as it might appear. For example, Arctic Wolf’s data indicates that senior staff, not junior employees, are often prime targets because of their privileged access and decision-making authority. The company found that nearly four in ten executive teams experienced phishing attempts, compared with lower rates among general staff.

Other research appears to support this pattern. For example, Verizon’s 2025 Data Breach Investigations Report confirms that social engineering remains one of the top causes of data breaches, accounting for more than two-thirds of all initial intrusion methods. Its analysis identifies finance, healthcare, education, and retail as the most heavily targeted sectors. Attackers exploit trust, urgency, and routine workflows to trick users into sharing credentials or downloading malware.

New Hires More Likely To Click

Also, a mid-2025 study by Keepnet, reported by Help Net Security, found that 71 per cent of new hires clicked on phishing emails during their first 90 days, making them 44 per cent more likely to fall victim than longer-serving staff. The main reasons were unfamiliar internal systems, a desire to respond quickly to apparent authority figures, and inconsistent onboarding security training. The same research found that structured, role-specific training reduced click rates by around 30 per cent within three months.

Retail Legacy Systems An Issue

Retail has also seen a marked increase in phishing incidents across the UK and Ireland. Arctic Wolf attributes this to the industry’s reliance on legacy systems, seasonal sales spikes, and the complexity of managing large volumes of customer data. The company says these factors have made retail “a prime target” for opportunistic and scalable attacks.

Can Employers Really Sack Staff For Clicking A Phishing Email?

In the UK, simply sacking an employee for falling for a phishing email is legally possible but rarely straightforward. For example, under the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (Acas) Code of Practice, an employer can only dismiss fairly if they have both a valid reason, such as misconduct or capability, and have followed a fair and reasonable procedure.

For a dismissal to be lawful, the employer must investigate properly, give the employee a chance to respond, and ensure the sanction is proportionate. Even where a phishing incident causes financial loss or reputational damage, the question is whether the individual acted negligently or was misled despite reasonable training and policies. In most cases, a first-time mistake caused by deception would not actually meet the threshold for gross misconduct.

Unfair Dismissal?

It’s worth noting here that employees with two years’ service can bring a claim for unfair dismissal if they believe the reason or process was unreasonable. Employment tribunals are required to take the Acas Code into account, and may increase or reduce compensation by up to 25 per cent if either side fails to follow it. This means employers that act punitively without clear evidence or consistent practice could face costly legal challenges.

Most employment lawyers, therefore, recommend a corrective rather than disciplinary response, especially where the organisation’s training or technical safeguards may have been insufficient. Arctic Wolf’s data reflects this tendency, with many leaders actually opting to limit access rights rather than dismiss staff outright after a phishing incident.

Ethics And Culture

Beyond legality, there is an ethical debate here to take account of which focuses on culture and transparency. For example, the UK’s National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) advises that creating a “no-blame reporting culture” is one of the most effective ways to reduce security risk. Its guidance stresses that employees should feel safe to report suspicious emails or mistakes immediately, without fear of reprisal.

In fact, it is well known that when punishment is the first response, employees often stay silent. Arctic Wolf’s own findings appear to bear this out, i.e., one in five security leaders who clicked a phishing link failed to report it. That silence can allow breaches to escalate before they are detected.

Human Error Inevitable

Security experts argue that treating human error as inevitable, and training people to respond effectively, is far more effective than zero-tolerance policies. Marrè says that “progress comes when leaders accept that human risk is not just a frontline issue but a shared accountability across the organisation.” He advocates regular, engaging training that reflects real threats, backed by leadership example and open communication.

The Double Standard In Practice

The data from this and other reports appears to paint a clear picture of contradiction at the top. For example, many of the same leaders who advocate sacking staff for phishing errors have clicked links themselves or disabled controls that protect the wider organisation. Arctic Wolf’s report describes this as “a culture of ‘do as I say, not as I do’,” warning that it undermines credibility and increases exposure to social engineering attacks.

Phishing Now More Sophisticated

One other important factor to take into account here is the fact that phishing techniques have also grown more sophisticated. For example, attackers now use AI-generated emails, cloned websites, and real-time chat-based scams to trick users into sharing credentials. Even experienced professionals can, therefore, struggle to spot these messages, particularly when they appear to come from known suppliers or senior colleagues.

AI Supercharges Phishing Success

Microsoft’s 2025 Digital Defence Report shows that AI-generated phishing emails are 4.5 times more likely to fool recipients, achieving a 54 per cent click-through rate compared with 12 per cent for traditional scams. The company says this surge in realism and scale has made phishing “the most significant change in cybercrime over the last year”.

Microsoft also estimates that AI can make phishing campaigns up to 50 times more profitable, as attackers use automation to craft messages in local languages, tailor lures, and launch mass campaigns with minimal effort. Beyond email, AI is now being used to scan for vulnerabilities, clone voices, and create deepfakes, transforming phishing into one of the fastest-growing and most lucrative attack methods worldwide.

Initial Compromise Comes From Phishing

Industry-wide data continues to show that phishing is the most common initial attack vector in business email compromise, ransomware, and credential theft cases. Verizon’s latest data shows phishing accounts for roughly 73 per cent of initial compromise methods, followed by previously stolen credentials. These statistics underline how difficult it is to eliminate human error entirely, even in well-trained environments.

Arctic Wolf argues that genuine progress actually requires leading by example rather than blaming employees. In its report, the company’s closing recommendations include continuous education, practical simulations, and building a culture that rewards honesty over silence. Its research concludes that organisations where employees feel confident to report mistakes are significantly less likely to experience repeat incidents, and far more likely to detect breaches early.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

The findings appear to highlight a cultural challenge within cyber security. Punishing individuals for mistakes that even experienced leaders admit to making risks undermining the very trust and openness that strong defences depend on. The evidence shows that while technical safeguards such as MFA and endpoint protection are essential, they are not enough on their own. What really differentiates resilient organisations is how they handle human error, whether they choose to learn from it or treat it as grounds for dismissal.

For UK businesses, the implications are significant. A strict zero-tolerance policy towards phishing may appear decisive, but it can also damage morale, suppress reporting, and expose employers to potential legal and reputational risks. Dismissing staff without due process could also lead to unfair dismissal claims, while a culture of fear can discourage the transparency needed to contain attacks quickly. By contrast, firms that take a measured, education-focused approach tend to see fewer repeat incidents, faster recovery times, and stronger employee engagement in security.

The message from Arctic Wolf’s data is that leadership example matters most. When senior executives model good cyber hygiene, acknowledge their own vulnerabilities, and support open communication, staff are far more likely to follow suit. Creating an environment where everyone feels responsible for reporting threats, and confident they will be supported for doing so, delivers a far greater return than any punitive measure.

For regulators, investors, training providers and others, the findings reinforce the importance of human-centred strategies that combine accountability with education. As phishing continues to evolve in sophistication, organisations across all sectors must balance clear policy enforcement with a recognition that even the best-informed professionals can make mistakes. The organisations that respond to that reality with fairness, transparency, and leadership integrity will be the ones best equipped to withstand the next wave of attacks.

The post Featured Article : 77% of Security Leaders Would Sack Phishing Victims appeared first on Mear Technology.

The Study and Report

The analysis comes from the British Standards Institution’s new insight report, ‘Evolving Together: AI, Automation and Building the Skilled Workforce of the Future’. It surveyed more than 850 business leaders across eight countries, including the UK, and used AI tools to review 123 company annual reports to see how often themes such as automation, upskilling, and training appeared. The study set out to understand how employers are using AI, which roles are being affected, and what this means for workforce development and future talent pipelines.

What Employers Are Doing

The key finding of the report appears to be that employers are now actively testing AI before employing people. The report says that nearly a third of business leaders said their organisation explores an AI solution before considering a human hire. Two in five said AI is already helping them reduce their headcount, while a similar number reported that entry-level roles had already been reduced or cut as AI took on research and administrative work. Looking ahead, 43 per cent said they expect further reductions in junior roles over the next year. In the UK, 38 per cent of leaders expect to cut junior positions, and three quarters said AI is already helping reduce headcount.

The language appearing in company reports appears to tell a similar story. For example, the term “automation” appeared nearly seven times more often than “upskilling”, “training”, or “education”, suggesting that businesses are now prioritising cost reduction and efficiency over long-term workforce investment. Over half of those surveyed also said the benefits of implementing AI outweigh the disruption to jobs.

Why?

It seems that employers are framing AI as a route to productivity and competitiveness. For example, 61 per cent cited productivity and efficiency as a main reason for investing in AI, 49 per cent pointed to cost reduction, and 43 per cent said AI helps fill skills gaps. However, the BSI report notes that competitive pressure may be driving these decisions as much as actual evidence of success. Many businesses are keen not to appear behind their rivals, even if financial results are uncertain.

What It Means For Gen Z And Early Careers

For younger workers entering the job market, it looks as though the picture is becoming more challenging. Adzuna data shows that UK entry-level vacancies have fallen by about a third since late 2022, with such roles now representing a smaller share of all job postings. Also, Indeed has reported a one-third year-on-year fall in graduate listings, marking the toughest market since 2018. The BSI study captures the employer side of this trend, where a quarter of bosses believe all or most entry-level tasks could now be handled by AI.

BSI’s leaders warn about the long-term cost of this approach. “AI represents an enormous opportunity for businesses globally, but as they chase greater productivity and efficiency, we must not lose sight of the fact that it is ultimately people who power progress,” said Susan Taylor Martin, chief executive of BSI. She called for long-term workforce investment alongside AI spending. Kate Field, BSI’s global head of human and social sustainability, added that prioritising short-term productivity over early-career development risks weakening the skills pipeline and deepening generational inequality.

Signals From The Labour Market

The UK labour market itself has cooled through the summer. Official figures show unemployment at 4.7 per cent between May and July, a four-year high. Economists caution against linking this entirely to AI adoption, although the technology is clearly reshaping entry-level hiring.

International bodies are also monitoring exposure. For example, the International Monetary Fund estimates around 60 per cent of jobs in advanced economies could be affected by AI, with roughly half of these potentially seeing lower demand for human labour. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has also found that about a third of vacancies are in occupations highly exposed to AI, with the UK near the top of that range. These findings support the idea that early-career, white-collar roles are among the most vulnerable to rapid automation.

Implications For Employers And Businesses

For companies, the short-term benefits are obvious. For example, AI can automate repetitive tasks, consolidate workflows, and reduce costs in areas such as administration, research, and reporting. However, the medium-term risk is quite significant. If firms eliminate entry-level positions faster than they develop new skills, they could face shortages of experienced managers and specialists later on. BSI’s analysis shows that larger companies are moving faster on headcount reduction than small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), but they are also more likely to have a formal AI learning and development programme. That leaves SMEs in a difficult position, potentially expected to train the next generation of workers while competing for scarce talent.

What About ROI?

Return on investment is another area of uncertainty. For example, IBM’s 2025 CEO Study reported that only a quarter of AI initiatives had actually delivered expected results in recent years, and an MIT-linked study this summer found that most enterprise generative AI projects produced no measurable effect on profit or efficiency. An EY survey of nearly a thousand large companies reached similar conclusions, finding that many experienced early financial losses due to compliance issues, inaccurate outputs, and operational disruption. These findings suggest that while firms are enthusiastic about AI, many are still learning how to achieve any real value from it.

Employees And The Economy

For workers, especially Gen Z, the decline in entry-level roles reduces opportunities to gain essential experience. That has implications for career progression, pay growth, and social mobility. The BSI findings also highlight sentiment among managers, more than half of whom said they feel lucky to have started their careers before AI became widespread. This fuels perceptions among younger people that they face a more precarious employment landscape. The Trades Union Congress has also reported that half of UK adults worry AI could alter or take their job, underlining growing anxiety around the technology’s impact on employment.

At the wider economic level, a balanced transition is crucial. For example, international studies suggest that AI can raise productivity if it’s paired with investment in human skills. The OECD links high AI exposure with rising demand for management, social, and digital capabilities, while the IMF stresses that policy and employer choices will determine whether AI adoption produces better jobs or simply less work. It should be noted that the direction is not inevitable, but depends on how businesses and governments respond.

Other Stakeholders

For AI providers, the BSI data signals strong short-term demand for automation tools, especially those aimed at streamlining office-based and knowledge roles. It also points to increasing scrutiny. Employers are demanding clearer evidence of ROI, and policymakers are watching workforce impacts closely. Some commentators, for example, are warning about inflated AI valuations, and the IMF has highlighted the risk of market concentration among a few large AI firms. For educators and training providers, the opportunity is equally clear. If businesses are automating junior roles, then building AI literacy and human-centred skills such as creativity, empathy, and collaboration into education and early careers becomes increasingly essential.

Challenges And Criticisms

Taking a step back, three key issues appear to stand out from all this:

1. An over-reliance on automation without parallel investment in upskilling risks hollowing out future leadership pipelines. The imbalance in corporate language, where automation dominates over training, suggests short-termism.

2. ROI from AI remains inconsistent. For example, surveys from IBM, MIT, and EY show that many organisations either struggle to capture financial gains or face early project losses, raising doubts about the business case for replacing human development with automation.

3. There is now a widening gap between large and small employers in their ability to offer AI-related training. That leaves SMEs carrying much of the responsibility for developing Gen Z talent while lacking the same resources as bigger corporations.

BSI’s leaders emphasise that an AI-enabled workforce still needs to be developed. The report concludes that “the future belongs to skills that machines can’t replicate—for example, creativity, empathy, and collaboration.” Businesses, it says, must evolve to nurture these human strengths alongside technical literacy if they want to remain competitive and sustainable.

Looking Ahead

Looking ahead, hiring trends at the entry level are likely to be the key measure. Job-board data through 2025 already shows fewer openings in several professional fields even as AI-related roles expand. Policy direction will also be crucial. The British Standards Institution and other regulators are expected to continue shaping frameworks for responsible AI adoption. Measuring productivity outcomes and workforce investment side by side will determine whether this phase of AI-driven restructuring delivers lasting value, or leaves a generation behind.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

The findings in the report suggest that the next stage of AI adoption will test how well businesses balance efficiency with long-term workforce stability. Employers that continue cutting entry-level positions without replacing them with structured learning or graduate pathways could soon face internal skills gaps that limit growth. For UK businesses, this raises a strategic question about sustainability. For example, automation can reduce costs, but without a consistent flow of skilled recruits, firms may find themselves competing for an ever-smaller pool of experienced professionals, pushing up wages and weakening future competitiveness.

There are also wider economic implications to consider. A reduction in entry-level hiring may suppress social mobility and delay young workers’ transition into full employment, which in turn affects consumer spending and tax revenues. Economists have warned that productivity gains from AI will only materialise if human capital keeps pace with technology. For policymakers, the challenge will be encouraging responsible innovation while safeguarding the foundations of the labour market. The BSI’s call for long-term thinking reflects growing concern that the UK’s current AI strategy must be paired with investment in training and skills if the benefits are to be shared across society.

For AI companies, the trend creates both opportunity and risk. Demand for automation is strong, but expectations are rising. Businesses are beginning to scrutinise outcomes more closely and may demand clearer, measurable returns. Providers that can demonstrate reliability, data security, and real efficiency improvements will be best placed to maintain momentum once early enthusiasm fades. Education and training providers also stand to gain if they can help bridge the gap between technical capability and human development, ensuring that younger workers can work effectively with, rather than against, AI systems.

Beyond the headline story here, the more rounded message emerging from the BSI’s report, is that the path forward cannot rely solely on automation. Businesses, governments, and educators will need to work together to build a future workforce that complements AI rather than competes with it. Without that alignment, the short-term pursuit of productivity could come at the long-term expense of capability, resilience, and opportunity.

The post Featured Article : Employers Choose AI Over Gen Z appeared first on Mear Technology.

A Grounded Reality Check

A comprehensive study by economists Anders Humlum (University of Chicago) and Emilie Vestergaard (University of Copenhagen) has found that the economic impact of generative AI chatbots on workers has been negligible. Their paper, Large Language Models, Small Labor Market Effects, analysed data from over 25,000 workers across 7,000 Danish workplaces between 2023 and 2024, focused on 11 occupations considered highly susceptible to AI disruption, including software developers, journalists, legal professionals, and teachers.

No Significant Impact

According to findings published in the paper, despite widespread adoption, most firms encouraged chatbot use, 38 per cent deployed in-house models, and 30 per cent of employees received AI training. Crucially, the study found no significant changes in earnings or working hours across any occupation. The researchers, therefore, concluded that “AI chatbots have had no significant impact on earnings or recorded hours in any occupation.”

Just Modest Productivity Gains

It seems that while users reported modest productivity gains, averaging time savings of 2.8 per cent to 5.4 per cent of their weekly hours, these did not translate into reduced workloads. In fact, AI adoption led to new tasks for 8.4 per cent of workers, such as supervising AI outputs or adapting workflows to accommodate the technology.

Other Research Supporting The Findings

Other recent research has also reached similar conclusions. For example, a separate analysis by Barclays, led by economist Mark Cus Babic, examined AI exposure across various occupations and industries in the U.S. and Europe. The study found that less than 10 per cent of core job tasks could be better performed by AI. Interestingly, occupations most exposed to AI were not always at risk of being replaced. For example, while roles like proofreaders and typists are more susceptible to automation, professions requiring significant interpersonal skills, such as translators, are less replaceable.

Contrary to fears of widespread job losses, therefore, the Barclays analysis found that AI exposure correlated with employment growth, not reduction.

However, this study also noted that AI exposure was linked to slower wage growth, with rising AI exposure reducing annualised wage growth by up to 0.74 percentage points.

Contrasting Findings

While these studies suggest a limited immediate impact of generative AI on jobs and wages, other recent research presents a more nuanced picture. For example:

– A 2024 PwC report found that sectors with high AI penetration experienced nearly fivefold greater labour productivity growth compared to less exposed sectors. In the UK, job postings requiring AI skills were growing significantly faster, with employers offering a 14 per cent wage premium, particularly in legal and IT roles. The findings were based on global employment and productivity data tracked by PwC’s Economic Outlook research team.

– A 2023 study by researchers from the University of Oxford and the University of Copenhagen, analysing online labour market data from platforms like Upwork and Freelancer, observed a decline in demand for text-related and programming-related jobs following the introduction of ChatGPT. However, the remaining jobs in these submarkets became more complex, and competition among freelancers increased, suggesting a shift in the nature rather than the volume of work.

– Joint research published in 2023 by the International Labour Organisation and the World Bank indicated that generative AI could potentially automate between 2 per cent and 5 per cent of jobs across Latin America and the Caribbean. The study warned that women and younger workers in formal employment sectors were likely to be disproportionately affected, especially in roles involving routine cognitive tasks.

The Implications

In terms of the implications of the most recent University of Copenhagen research, the minimal immediate impact on jobs and wages may prompt AI developers to reassess their value propositions. It seems that while the technology holds promise for enhancing productivity, the anticipated economic benefits have yet to materialise at scale.

Also, based on these findings, companies investing in AI may want to temper expectations regarding short-term labour cost savings. Instead, the focus could shift towards leveraging AI for incremental efficiency gains and exploring new business models that integrate AI capabilities.

In terms of what this could mean for governments and policymakers, the findings appear to suggest that fears of an imminent AI-induced employment crisis may be overstated. However, the potential for AI to reshape job tasks and create new roles underscores the need for policies that support workforce adaptability, such as reskilling initiatives and education reforms.

As for workers, while it seems (according to this study) that AI has not yet led to significant job displacement, its integration into the workplace is undoubtedly altering job responsibilities. This could mean that workers may need to adapt by acquiring new skills and embracing lifelong learning to remain competitive in an evolving job market.

Perception vs Reality?

One of the more striking contrasts emerging from this research is the growing gulf between how AI is perceived and how it’s actually performing in economic terms. It seems that public debate has largely centred around the threat of mass job displacement, with headlines warning of “white-collar extinction events” and sweeping automation of knowledge work. Yet the data so far simply doesn’t back that up.

For example, a 2024 Ipsos MORI survey found that 61 per cent of UK workers believe AI will significantly reduce job availability within the next decade. However, this fear appears to be driven more by speculation and media narratives than current evidence. Researchers like Humlum and Vestergaard stress that even in sectors with widespread chatbot adoption, measurable labour impacts have been “remarkably muted”.

This mismatch between expectations and evidence could have real consequences, potentially fuelling anxiety, political pressure, or misaligned policy responses. It also raises a challenge for AI companies and advocates, i.e. how to communicate realistic use cases and limitations without losing investor interest or public trust.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

What this research ultimately seems to reveal is a still-unfolding story, and one that is far less dramatic than the early hype may have suggested. While it’s true that generative AI is being widely adopted across white-collar industries, it looks as though the impact on wages and jobs appears, for now, to be largely neutral. That’s not to say AI isn’t changing the workplace (far from it). However, the kind of sweeping disruption that many predicted simply hasn’t (yet) arrived.

For UK businesses, this latest research provides a valuable window of clarity. It means that rather than expecting AI to deliver immediate cost savings through workforce reductions, firms may find more tangible returns in using chatbots to refine workflows, support staff with repetitive tasks, and free up time for more valuable work. In practical terms, that means revisiting where AI fits in the broader business model, not as a silver bullet for efficiency, but as a support tool, and one that still needs oversight, training, and adaptation to work effectively.

For governments, the findings highlight the importance of measured, evidence-based policymaking. While it’s right to prepare for potential shifts in the labour market, it seems there’s currently no need for panic. The real focus might be better placed on supporting agility within the workforce, e.g. through investment in digital skills, better access to lifelong learning, and guidance for employers on effective technology adoption.

Meanwhile, for AI developers, the study is a reminder that user adoption doesn’t always equal economic impact. The technology may be advancing rapidly, but converting that into broad-based value remains a work in progress. As such, the next wave of innovation may need to focus less on scaling up infrastructure, and more on proving real-world outcomes, especially for sectors still unsure how to integrate these tools meaningfully.

In short, this research invites recalibration and puts things a little more in perspective. Generative AI is here, it’s being used, and it’s shaping how work gets done, yet its impact (at least for now) appears to be evolutionary rather than revolutionary. The real question may no longer be whether AI will replace jobs, but whether we’re ready to redesign the way we work alongside it.

The post Featured Article : AI Isn’t Slashing Jobs or Wages (Yet) appeared first on Mear Technology.

The Report

WEF’s Future of Jobs Report 2025 was based on insights from over 1,000 employers representing more than 14 million workers across 22 industry sectors and 55 economies, and sheds light on how AI is influencing employment trends. It confirms both the risks and opportunities workers face as automation accelerates across industries.

The AI Divide Creating Winners and Losers in the Job Market

The report’s findings indicate that, as AI continues to evolve, it is creating a clear divide in the job market. For example, the report identifies roles requiring creativity, complex decision-making, or human interaction as safer from automation, while repetitive, clerical roles face steep declines. Among the most at-risk professions highlighted are data entry clerks, bank tellers, and administrative assistants, with job displacement expected to reach 92 million roles by 2030!

The report notes that, “Half of employers plan to reorient their business in response to AI” with 40 per cent anticipating workforce reductions as tasks become automated. On the other hand, two-thirds of companies plan to hire talent with AI-specific skills. This apparent duality highlights the transformative potential of AI, i.e. as a disruptor for some people, and as an enabler for others.

Adapt or Be Left Behind

AI’s influence is not just about replacing jobs but it’s redefining the skills workers need to thrive. It appears from the report that employers will be increasingly looking for expertise in AI and big data, networks and cybersecurity, and technological literacy, as these skills become essential to navigating the growing dominance of digital technologies in workplace transformation. However, resilience, flexibility, and creative thinking remain equally critical.

Skills Outdated by 2030

One statistic of note from the report for many in the workforce is that employers surveyed expect nearly 39 per cent of existing skill sets to become outdated by 2030, thereby highlighting the urgent need for reskilling and upskilling.

The report also estimates that if the world’s workforce were condensed into 100 people, 59 would require retraining within the next five years, emphasising the scale of transformation underway.

A Mixed Outlook for Job Creation

While fears of job loss dominate headlines, the report, thankfully, paints a more nuanced picture. It seems that, on the upside, the churn caused by AI and other macrotrends is expected to result in 170 million new jobs globally by 2030, thereby offsetting much of the displacement and yielding a net gain of 78 million roles.

1 in 5 Jobs to Experience Significant Change

The report also highlights how “On current trends over the 2025 to 2030 period, job creation and destruction due to structural labour-market transformation will amount to 22 per cent of today’s total jobs”. This means one in five jobs will experience significant change over the next five years.

Growth Sectors

Some of the key growth sectors identified by the report include technology-related roles (e.g. AI and Machine Learning Specialists, Big Data Analysts) and green economy jobs, such as Renewable Energy Engineers and Electric Vehicle Specialists. The care economy is also set to flourish, with nursing professionals, social workers, and personal care aides in high demand due to ageing populations.

Hands-On Roles Are Thriving

For jobs requiring physical skill and on-site presence, according to the report, the future looks secure. It seems that professions like plumbing, construction, delivery driving, and farming are set to see significant growth, according to the WEF. These roles remain shielded from AI disruption because they demand physical dexterity, adaptability, and complex problem-solving, i.e. traits that current AI and robotics cannot replicate. As the report highlights, hands-on roles, along with those in care and education, are among the most resilient as the workforce evolves.

Also, jobs in the education sector, including secondary and higher education teachers, are expected to grow as demographic shifts increase demand for skilled educators in regions with expanding working-age populations.

Macrotrends Shaping Work

For perspective and context, it’s important to note that although AI adoption is growing rapidly, AI is just one of the many forces at play. For example, the report also outlines five key macrotrends driving labour market transformation, which are:

1. Technological change. AI, robotics, and automation are driving rapid shifts in work practices and job requirements.

2. Green transition. Climate-change mitigation efforts are spurring demand for roles like Renewable Energy Engineers and Environmental Scientists.

3. Demographic shifts. Ageing populations in high-income countries are increasing demand for healthcare and social care workers, while expanding working-age populations in developing nations boost opportunities in education and talent management.

4. Economic uncertainty. Rising costs of living and inflation are causing businesses to rethink their workforce strategies.

5. Geoeconomic fragmentation. Trade restrictions and geopolitical tensions are reshaping supply chains and influencing workforce trends.

Human-Machine Collaboration

The Future of Jobs Report 2025 also highlights a shift in how work is performed, with 47 per cent of tasks currently done by humans alone expected to decrease to just 33 per cent by 2030. Instead, it’s predicted that tasks will increasingly rely on automation and human-machine collaboration.

This trend presents both challenges and opportunities. While automation will handle repetitive tasks, augmented roles (i.e. where humans and machines work together) are expected to redefine productivity across sectors.

Not All Regions or Industries Are Equal

According to the report, the impact of these trends varies widely by region and industry. For example, advanced economies are leading the adoption of AI and green technologies, while developing nations, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa and parts of Asia, are focused on education and talent development to capitalise on their growing working-age populations.

Industries like telecommunications and finance are racing ahead in automation, while more human-centric sectors like healthcare and education emphasise augmentation and workforce training.

No Profession Is Entirely Immune

The message from the Future of Jobs Report 2025 is clear – no profession is entirely immune to change. While plumbers may be safe for now, all workers must remain vigilant, adaptable, and ready to acquire new skills as technology continues to evolve.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

The findings of the WEF’s Future of Jobs Report paint a picture of a rapidly transforming labour market. While hands-on professions like plumbing may appear secure for now, the broader message of the report is one of inevitability, i.e. change will come and no industry or profession can remain entirely untouched by the waves of technological and economic disruption.

The reassurance for those in manual and human-centred roles lies in the limitations of current AI and robotics. These technologies, while impressive, cannot yet replicate the physical dexterity, nuanced decision-making, or adaptability required in jobs such as plumbing, farming, and caregiving. However, even these sectors are not immune to ancillary changes brought about by economic pressures, demographic shifts, and broader technological trends.

At the same time, the report highlights the urgency of adaptation across the workforce. The growing demand for AI-specific skills and the prediction that nearly 40 per cent of current skill sets will become outdated by 2030 indicate a clear need for reskilling and upskilling at an unprecedented scale. Workers who embrace technological literacy and cultivate traits like creativity, resilience, and flexibility will find themselves better positioned to thrive in an increasingly automated world.

For industries and regions, the picture is more complex. Advanced economies are accelerating the adoption of AI and green technologies, while developing nations focus on demographic dividends and educational reforms to harness their expanding working-age populations. This uneven development means opportunities and challenges will not be evenly distributed, adding another layer of complexity to an already dynamic global labour market.

Also, the concept of human-machine collaboration is a central theme in the report, thereby offering a glimpse into the potential future of work. It seems that rather than displacing human labour entirely, automation and AI could complement and enhance human capabilities, enabling greater productivity and innovation. However, achieving this balance will depend on proactive investment in skills.

The WEF’s Future of Jobs Report, therefore, shows that while there is a risk of displacement, there is also significant potential for growth and reinvention. The message is that workers in all sectors must be ready to navigate this new landscape, embracing the opportunities and preparing for the challenges. For now, plumbers may remain safe, but vigilance, adaptability, and a willingness to evolve will be essential.

The post Featured Article : Plumbers Are Safe … For Now appeared first on Mear Technology.

Why The Shift To Flexible? 

The shift to flexible work options emerged as a swift response to the COVID-19 pandemic, upending conventional workplace structures and prompting a worldwide embrace of remote work. In the years since, companies have wrestled with balancing the benefits of flexibility versus the perceived advantages of in-office work. Many executives have argued that a return-to-office (RTO) mandate is essential for fostering collaboration and sustaining company culture. However, new research from the University of Melbourne, alongside other prominent studies, suggests that flexible work options may actually be more financially beneficial than once thought, delivering enhanced market performance and operational resilience. 

This growing body of research provides a new perspective on the RTO debate, challenging the notion that office-based work is superior for long-term business success. With some high-profile companies like Amazon and Dell pushing hard for RTO, while others like Spotify continue to champion flexibility, the research invites a closer look at how work structures impact company value. Additionally, the financial benefits of flexible work have been underpinned by Managed Service Providers (MSPs), who have become instrumental in supporting secure remote work setups. 

The Financial Case for Flexible Work 

As mentioned above, the University of Melbourne’s recent study, spearheaded by Dr Gabriele Lattanzio, Assistant Professor of Finance, found that companies with strong flexible work options have seen notable financial gains. By analysing the stock performance of firms listed on the “100 Best Companies for Remote Working Jobs,” published annually by Forbes and developed by FlexJobs, Dr Lattanzio observed that these companies achieved better-than-average stock returns over time. 

“This study documents for the first time that firms’ reliance on alternative work arrangements is associated with superior long-horizon stock market returns beyond what can be explained by other systematic risk factors,” said Dr Lattanzio. His research suggests that companies offering remote work options often benefit from enhanced employee satisfaction and productivity, as well as improved operational flexibility, all of which contribute positively to long-term financial performance. 

Remote Work Yields a 7.44 Per Cent Higher Return 

According to the study, an equal-weighted portfolio of the firms on the FlexJobs list between 2014 and 2019 generated an annualised four-factor alpha of 7.44 per cent (they achieved an annual average return of 7.44 per cent higher) than companies that didn’t focus on remote work. 

Underestimating and Underappreciating 

The research also shows that these companies often delivered positive earnings surprises, with analysts consistently underestimating their financial performance. For example, as noted by Dr Lattanzio, “Analysts fail to price in the productivity gains associated with corporate engagements in alternative work arrangements”. This inefficiency suggests a blind spot in the market, where the benefits of remote work on firm value may be underappreciated. 

How Can Flexible Work Policies Improve Market Performance? 

The University of Melbourne’s research highlights several key drivers behind the superior performance of remote-friendly companies. 

Employee satisfaction and productivity are central to these gains, as remote work arrangements allow employees to balance work with personal life, reducing stress and commuting time while enhancing engagement and output. Additionally, the operational flexibility provided by remote work enables companies to adapt quickly to changing demands without the overheads of maintaining a large physical presence. 

Dr Lattanzio’s study further indicates that remote work policies can make firms more resilient to “black swan” events, i.e. unexpected occurrences that can disrupt regular operations, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. According to the research, firms who embraced remote work early on were better equipped to navigate the disruptions of 2020, as they had already established systems to manage a decentralised workforce. As Dr Lattanzio says, “Our findings suggest that corporate reliance on WFH arrangements may contribute to increased resilience to unexpected shocks, providing companies with an advantage in times of crisis”. 

RTO Mandates Amid Positive Remote Work Data 

Despite evidence supporting flexible work, many companies have, however, decided to introduce strict RTO mandates. Amazon, for example, recently announced a five-day in-office policy, with CEO Andy Jassy insisting that employees unwilling to comply may need to consider alternative employment. Matt Garman, AWS CEO, echoed this stance, aligning with a belief that in-office work is essential for maintaining company culture and productivity. 

Dell, another technology giant, has also imposed an RTO mandate, despite backlash from employees who argue that remote work fosters a better work-life balance. 

In contrast, companies like Spotify have resisted RTO pressures, choosing instead to uphold a remote work model that trusts employees to manage their productivity autonomously. According to Spotify’s HR lead, treating employees like adults is a core part of their culture, and the company’s performance metrics indicate that productivity has not suffered under a remote model. For companies like Spotify, flexibility appears to serve as both a recruitment tool and a means of promoting employee well-being, which in turn boosts morale and reduces turnover. 

Other Research Echoes Melbourne’s Findings 

A growing body of research supports the financial and productivity gains linked to remote work. For example, Ernst & Young’s recent report (2024 Work Reimagined Survey) found that companies who maintained remote work policies during the pandemic saw improvements in staff retention and productivity, particularly in sectors where flexibility is valued. 

In the US, the National Bureau of Economic Research revealed that firms offering WFH options were able to reduce wage costs by around 8 per cent, as employees were often willing to accept slightly lower salaries in exchange for remote work flexibility. 

A 2020 survey by PWC (at the time of the pandemic) showed that 78 per cent of CEOs across various industries agreed that remote work was here to stay for the long term, with many noting that the productivity benefits were too significant to ignore. The survey also showed that, in particular, high-skill workers are drawn to roles offering remote options, making flexibility a competitive advantage in attracting top talent. As the PWC report stated, “Remote work options are now a critical factor in job satisfaction, which ultimately drives company performance.” 

What About MSPs? 

The implications for MSPs are similarly positive, as the shift to remote work has increased demand for remote support, security, and digital infrastructure services. With MSPs providing essential support for data security, compliance, and IT management in remote work environments, the growth of flexible work policies has translated into new revenue streams for these service providers. 

Studies Suggesting Drawbacks of Remote Work 

While the majority of recent research supports the positive impact of remote work on financial performance, a few studies point to potential downsides. 

For example, a 2023 Gallup survey highlighted that remote workers increasingly feel disconnected from their organisation’s mission, with only 28 per cent reporting a strong connection, down from 32 per cent in 2022. 

Similarly, a Harvard Business Review article raised concerns that remote work can increase isolation, leading to lower employee engagement over time. This isolation effect has been linked to reduced teamwork and a lack of informal mentorship, which can be detrimental to professional growth. For certain roles, especially those involving complex problem-solving or highly interactive tasks, the office environment may indeed provide a superior setting. 

Back in 2021, the Wall Street Journal reported the challenges companies face in maintaining team cohesion and spontaneous collaboration in remote work settings. It highlighted how some companies had struggled to maintain team cohesion and spontaneous collaboration in a remote setting. It also suggested that face-to-face interactions are essential for innovation and effective communication, particularly for industries heavily reliant on teamwork and creativity. 

The Financial Outlook for Remote-Friendly Companies 

The University of Melbourne’s study, alongside supporting research from Ernst & Young and the National Bureau of Economic Research, appears to paint a promising picture for firms that embrace flexible work arrangements. With data indicating that remote-friendly companies are not only improving employee satisfaction but also outperforming the market, the case for RTO becomes harder to justify on financial grounds. 

Flexible Work Advantageous 

Flexible work policies have also proven advantageous in helping companies adapt to external shocks, as seen during the pandemic, when remote-capable firms were able to transition smoothly into lockdown conditions. According to Dr Lattanzio’s research, this adaptability is one of the hidden strengths of remote work, allowing companies to remain operationally resilient and financially stable, even amid global disruptions. 

Rigid Policies May Carry Unintended Costs 

For CEOs and boards considering RTO mandates, these findings suggest that rigid office policies may come at a significant cost. As more research highlights the positive relationship between remote work and company performance, firms may need to reconsider the financial impact of strict workplace policies. With employee satisfaction and market performance increasingly tied to flexibility, mandating office attendance could undermine long-term profitability and talent retention. 

What Does This Mean for Your Business? 

The shift towards flexible work policies, as shown in the University of Melbourne and other recent studies, appears to offer compelling evidence that remote work can drive financial and operational advantages. For businesses, this means that offering flexibility should be viewed not just as an employee benefit but as a strategic decision with measurable financial rewards. The data points to remote-friendly companies achieving higher returns and enhanced resilience in times of crisis, suggesting that businesses embracing flexibility may be better positioned for long-term success. For many organisations, this raises important questions about whether in-office mandates are truly necessary or beneficial in today’s evolving work environment. 

For companies concerned about remote work’s potential drawbacks, it’s worth noting that while some roles and industries benefit from face-to-face collaboration, a hybrid approach could address concerns about team cohesion and spontaneous interaction without sacrificing flexibility. Studies have highlighted potential issues with remote work, such as feelings of isolation and reduced engagement, but these can often be mitigated through intentional team-building efforts and regular virtual check-ins. Given the financial gains tied to remote work, businesses might consider investing in initiatives that foster connection and collaboration within a flexible framework rather than imposing strict return-to-office mandates. 

The rise of flexible work also holds implications for Managed Service Providers (MSPs) supporting remote infrastructure, data security, and IT management. For MSPs, the increase in remote work demands has opened up new revenue streams, as companies seek reliable, secure digital solutions to support dispersed teams. With remote work driving long-term growth in digital support services, MSPs that are effective in providing remote setups may be well-positioned to capitalise on the growing need for secure and efficient work-from-anywhere models. 

It seems, therefore, that businesses now have access to a wealth of data supporting the financial and operational benefits of flexible work policies. Adapting to this trend could improve market performance and employee satisfaction, positioning companies competitively in an increasingly flexibility-focused market. However, firms that insist on strict in-office mandates may risk falling behind, both in attracting top talent and achieving optimal financial performance. Embracing flexibility, whether through remote, hybrid, or custom arrangements, could be key to sustaining growth and remaining resilient in a dynamic economic landscape. 

As flexible work policies become more common and continue to evolve, each business will need to evaluate how best to incorporate this shift into its long-term strategy. In an era where adaptability and employee satisfaction are crucial to success, the decision to implement flexible work policies may no longer be just about convenience, but about future-proofing your business for an increasingly agile and unpredictable world.

The post Featured Article : Flexible Working Drives Financial Gains appeared first on Mear Technology.

Why Use Continuous Authentication Technology? 

Businesses use continuous authentication technology to enhance security, i.e. to add an extra layer of protection. As the name suggests, this type of software continuously verifies users throughout their session, rather than relying solely on traditional one-time authentication methods like passwords or PINs. This approach is designed to mitigate risks such as session hijacking, whereby unauthorised users gain access after the initial login, or insider threats where someone might misuse another’s logged-in session. Continuous authentication essentially helps detect abnormal behavior in real-time, flagging up potential breaches or fraud by monitoring unique patterns such as typing style, mouse movements, or facial recognition. By integrating this technology, businesses may hope to reduce security vulnerabilities, safeguard sensitive data, and improve compliance with industry regulations, all while maintaining a seamless user experience, i.e. it’s happening automatically in the background. 

BT Trialling Continuous Authentication Technology 

BT is reported to be trialling BehavioSec’s behavioral biometrics technology at its Adastral Park science campus near Ipswich. This software is used for continuous authentication, where it monitors users’ unique behavior patterns, such as how they type, move the mouse, or interact with their devices, to confirm their identity. However, in the case of BehavioSec’s technology, it doesn’t usually require the use of a camera, i.e. the user doesn’t need to filmed by a webcam all day. Instead, it can rely on analysis of a user’s behaviour patterns by looking at factors such as keystroke dynamics, mouse movements, touchscreen gestures, and device interaction patterns (e.g. how the user holds their phone, scrolls through pages, or interacts with specific applications). In the recent Metro story however, the reporter witnessed a demonstration of the system that did use facial recognition and required continuous filming of the user with a webcam/front-facing camera to detect whether the user’s face was consistent with expected dimensions. 

BT is exploring this technology as part of its broader efforts to improve cybersecurity, particularly in response to the growing threat of cyberattacks and data breaches. The trials of BehavioSec’s behavioral biometrics technology are part of BT’s research into how it can use innovative technology to better protect digital assets and infrastructure, especially in enterprise and government contexts. For example, back in 2022, BT said it would be taking security to a new level so that even if an attacker obtained a device, any ongoing work session would end, locking the device, because their biometrics wouldn’t match that of the device user’s known biometrics. 

Systems Using Cameras? 

There are, however, many such continuous authentication systems now available which require a camera being trained on a user’s face. A few prominent examples include: 

– FaceTec’s ZoOm. This is a 3D facial recognition solution that uses the front-facing camera of devices (it can use a webcam) to authenticate users, e.g. by carrying out “Liveness Checks, Face Matches & Photo ID Scans”. It’s often used in applications requiring high security, such as financial services or identity verification systems, and biometric security for remote digital identity. 

– FacePhi. This (Spanish) biometric solution for facial recognition is widely used in the banking, healthcare, and fintech sectors for secure access to mobile banking apps and fraud prevention. The software uses a camera to identify users and offers continuous authentication by tracking facial features during interactions. 

– IDEMIA’s VisionPass. This system combines 3D facial recognition with AI and uses cameras to recognise faces and continuously verify identities, even in challenging conditions like low light or with face masks. It’s generally deployed in secure facilities, airports, and government buildings for access control and ongoing authentication. 

– Trueface. This AI-powered facial recognition technology integrates with existing security systems, such as cameras in corporate offices, to provide continuous authentication. Trueface can recognise and track users in real-time, improving access security and is used in corporate offices, airports, and law enforcement for continuous identification and authentication. 

Other popular systems that use similar methods include Clearview AI, Neurotechnology’s Face Verification System, AnyVision, and ZKTeco’s FaceKiosk. 

It’s also worth noting here that the “big tech” companies’ versions, such Apple’s Face ID, Google’s Face Unlock (Pixel Devices), and Microsoft Windows ‘Hello’ are also facial recognition-based authentication systems that are classed as continuous authentication technology. However, for the purposes of this overview, we’re focusing on the kinds of systems that businesses may use for their own employees. 

Issues 

The usage of facial recognition (e.g. by law enforcement) has had its share of criticism in recent years. However, the thought of businesses using a camera to continuously film an employee, even if it may be for security purposes, such as continuous authentication, raises several serious issues and concerns. For example: 

– An invasion of privacy. With constant surveillance, employees may feel that their privacy is being violated. Cameras can capture not only work-related activities but also personal moments, which may lead to discomfort and a sense of being micromanaged. Cameras might inadvertently record personal or sensitive information, such as confidential discussions, which could be accessed or potentially misused. 

– The effect on employee trust and morale. Continuous filming can create an atmosphere of distrust between employees and employers. Workers may feel they are being monitored for reasons beyond security, leading to an atmosphere of fear, plus a decrease in morale and engagement (and ‘quiet quitting’). 

– Psychological stress. Constant camera surveillance can lead to stress or anxiety among employees, affecting their overall well-being and productivity, which could obviously be counterproductive for the company. 

– Data security and misuse. For example, video recordings of employees can contain sensitive biometric data, which, if compromised through a data breach, could have serious consequences. Biometric data is immutable, i.e. once stolen, it cannot be changed (like a password). There is a risk of video footage being misused, either by internal parties or external hackers. The footage could be exploited for purposes other than security, such as inappropriate monitoring of behavior or harassment. 

– Ethical concerns. These could arise if employees are not fully aware of the extent and purpose of the surveillance, or if they feel coerced into accepting it as a condition of employment. Also, filming employees all day can be viewed as excessive (overreach), especially if less invasive alternatives exist. Monitoring behavior to this degree may cross ethical boundaries of acceptable workplace practices. 

– Legal implications. Many regions have strict privacy laws (e.g. GDPR in Europe, CCPA in California) that require companies to obtain explicit consent for continuous surveillance and ensure the proportionality and necessity of such measures. Non-compliance could lead to legal consequences, fines, or lawsuits for a business. In some countries (or US states, for example) there are labour laws that protect employees from invasive workplace monitoring. Continuous surveillance may violate these protections if it is deemed too intrusive.  

– The Potential for bias and discrimination. Among other things, this could include algorithmic bias. If the continuous authentication system relies on facial recognition, there is a risk of bias against certain groups, such as racial minorities or those with disabilities, due to known issues with facial recognition accuracy across diverse demographics. Also, employees may worry that the surveillance data could be used for purposes other than security, such as evaluating performance, which could lead to discrimination or unfair treatment. 

– Technical reliability, e.g. false positives/negatives. Continuous authentication systems relying on cameras may fail, leading to false positives (unauthorised users being granted access) or false negatives (legitimate users being denied access). This can disrupt work and erode trust in the system. 

While continuous authentication aims to enhance security, using cameras to film employees all day raises significant challenges. Companies need to carefully balance security needs with privacy rights, ethical considerations, and legal compliance to avoid potential negative consequences. For example, in 2020, H&M (the German multinational clothing retailer) was fined €35.3 million by the Hamburg Data Protection Authority in Germany for violating GDPR due to excessive and invasive surveillance of employees. 

What Is ‘Emotional Analysis’ And Why Is It Causing Concern? 

Some continuous authentication software can now use ‘emotional analysis’. This refers to the use of AI to detect and interpret human emotions through cues like facial expressions, voice tones, or body language. Its purpose is to monitor and assess workers’ emotional states, such as stress, engagement, or satisfaction. It could help a business by providing insights into employee well-being and productivity, identifying signs of burnout or disengagement, and enabling management to respond proactively to improve workplace morale, increase efficiency, and enhance overall performance through better support and tailored interventions. 

However, its usage also raises significant concerns around privacy, accuracy, and bias. The technology is often inaccurate, particularly across different demographics, leading to misinterpretation of emotions. Its use in workplaces for employee monitoring can create a sense of invasion and stress, eroding trust, and morale. There are also ethical and legal issues, with fears of misuse for micromanagement or even manipulation of behavior, making its widespread deployment highly controversial. 

Susannah Copson, legal and policy officer with civil liberties and privacy campaigning organisation Big Brother Watch has described ‘emotion recognition technology’ as “pseudoscientific AI surveillance” and has called for it to be banned. 

What Do Rights Organisations Say? 

Big Brother Watch is strongly opposed to the unchecked growth of workplace surveillance tools, calling them an invasion of privacy, harmful to employee well-being, and in need of stricter regulation to protect workers’ rights. Big Brother Watch recently held an event at the UK at the Labour Party conference to launch its report on workplace surveillance in the UK, highlighting its increasing use by bosses and their employers, and its negative effects on employees.  

Big Brother Watch argues that workplace surveillance technologies, such as keystroke logging and AI-powered emotional analysis, invade employee privacy, erode trust, enable micromanagement, and harm mental health, potentially violating privacy laws like GDPR, while calling for stricter regulation to protect workers’ rights. 

How Much Has Workplace Surveillance Increased? 

A recent report by ExpressVPN, titled the “2023 State of Workplace Surveillance,” highlights a significant increase in workplace surveillance. Some key findings include: 

– 78 per cent of employers are using some form of employee monitoring tools in 2023, up from 60 per cent before the COVID-19 pandemic. 

– 57 per cent of employers implemented new surveillance tools specifically due to remote work conditions caused by the pandemic. 

– 41 per cent of companies now use software to track keystrokes, screenshots, or record the activity of employees’ screens. 

– 32 per cent of employers monitor employee emails and messages, while 25 per cent track employee location using GPS or IP data. 

A Growing Market 

This surge in monitoring reflects the growing reliance on digital surveillance tools to manage remote workforces. Regarding the market for identity and access management (IAM) and cybersecurity solutions, Gartner reported in its “Market Guide for User Authentication” that continuous authentication is gaining traction due to increasing concerns about cybersecurity and the limitations of traditional login methods.  

A MarketsandMarkets report has also noted that the global user authentication market, which includes continuous authentication solutions, is projected to grow from $13.9 billion in 2022 to $25.2 billion by 2027. A 2022 Verizon Data Breach Investigations Report also noted that 61 per cent of breaches involve stolen credentials and pushed companies to adopt continuous authentication as a preventive measure. 

What Can Employees Do? 

If employees are concerned about continuous camera monitoring such as that used with some continuous verification systems, the (realistic) options they have are to: 

– Review company policies to understand the purpose and limits of the surveillance. 

– Raise concerns with HR or management to request less invasive alternatives, like fingerprint or password-based methods. 

– Seek legal advice if monitoring violates privacy laws, or report it to a regulatory body like the ICO (in the UK).  

– Consult with a union to negotiate privacy protections, if applicable. 

– Document their issues for potential disputes and familarise themselves with their rights under local privacy and employment laws. 

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

The rise of continuous authentication software, particularly that using facial recognition and behavioural biometrics, highlights the tension between advancing cybersecurity and respecting employee privacy.

While the primary aim of these systems may be to offer ongoing, seamless security by monitoring users throughout their work sessions, the methods employed, such as continuous video surveillance or behavioural tracking, have raised significant ethical and privacy concerns. The promise of enhanced protection against cyberattacks, session hijacking, and insider threats is compelling, especially in industries where data security is paramount. However, the potential downsides of this technology can’t be ignored. 

One of the key concerns is the invasion of privacy. Employees may feel uncomfortable or even violated if they know that cameras or other tracking mechanisms are monitoring their every move. The potential for these systems to inadvertently capture non-work-related activities, or even sensitive personal interactions, adds to the unease. Continuous surveillance risks creating an atmosphere of distrust between employers and employees, fostering a sense of being constantly watched, which could have a detrimental effect on morale. In extreme cases, this might lead to disengagement, lower productivity, or even a rise in ‘quiet quitting,’ as employees withdraw emotionally from their work due to feeling over-monitored. 

Also, there are concerns about the psychological impact of constant surveillance. The knowledge that a camera or biometric system is perpetually tracking your behaviour can lead to stress, anxiety, and a feeling of being under perpetual scrutiny. This could, paradoxically, undermine the productivity gains that continuous authentication aims to protect. Employees working under these conditions might find it difficult to focus or perform optimally, especially if they perceive the surveillance as intrusive or excessive. 

In addition to these privacy and security concerns, there are ethical and legal considerations. In many jurisdictions, privacy laws require companies to obtain explicit consent for such monitoring and ensure that the measures are proportionate and necessary. Failure to comply with these regulations could lead to hefty fines or legal action (as seen in the case of H&M’s €35.3 million fine in Germany).  

There are also the issues of bias and discrimination. Facial recognition technologies have been shown to be less accurate across diverse demographic groups, potentially leading to unfair treatment of certain employees. If continuous authentication systems generate false positives or negatives due to these biases, it could create additional hurdles for employees from minority groups, further entrenching workplace inequalities. There is also the risk that the data gathered could be used for purposes beyond security, such as monitoring productivity or evaluating performance, which could lead to unfair assessments or discrimination. 

Despite these challenges, it is clear why businesses are keen to explore continuous authentication technology. The ever-present threat of cyberattacks, data breaches, and insider threats has made it essential for organisations to find new ways to secure their digital assets. Continuous authentication offers a promising solution by providing ongoing verification without disrupting the user experience. However, businesses must tread carefully, ensuring that these systems are deployed in ways that respect employee privacy, comply with legal requirements, and avoid creating a toxic work environment. 

As continuous authentication (seemingly inevitably) becomes more widespread, it will be crucial for businesses to engage in transparent communication with employees about how these systems work, why they are being implemented, and what safeguards are in place to protect their privacy. Offering alternative, less invasive methods, such as fingerprint recognition or password-based systems, may help alleviate some concerns. Ultimately, the successful adoption of continuous authentication will depend on striking the right balance between robust security measures and the protection of employee rights and well-being.

The post Featured Article : Would You Be Filmed Working At Your Desk All Day? appeared first on Mear Technology.

Why? 

Members of organisations inevitably change over time for various reasons, perhaps to relocate to another job and move away, or they may be asked to leave, or for many other reasons. However, when employees or contractors/third parties leave a business and there is no effective ‘offboarding’ plan or system in place, they are likely to still have access to your organisation’s systems and data through old passwords and access-rights. Like it or not, this makes them a potential threat to your business.  

Creating an effective offboarding plan and process that can be actioned (immediately) as the employee leaves, therefore, can protect you and your clients, maintain the security plus help ensure safe continuity of the business, whilst help to fulfill legal and stakeholder responsibilities.  

Such a plan and process can start with a simple checklist, although you may find it ends up being longer than you first thought. With this in mind, we take a close-up look at employee offboarding and provide a summary offboarding checklist that you may want to use to help with your own offboarding process.  

What Kind of Threats? 

Examples of the kinds of potential threats that an organisation may need to guard against upon employee exit include: 

– Damage, theft, and disruption. Departing employees can cause significant harm by stealing data, attacking company systems, or disrupting network operations due to lack of proper security measures. 

– Insider threat. Ex-employees with active access rights can leak sensitive information, engage in industrial espionage, extort the company, or steal customer data. Insider threats account for a significant portion of data breaches. 

– Data exfiltration. Departing employees might take sensitive information like client lists or intellectual property with them (intentionally or unintentionally), leading to competitive disadvantages and legal issues. 

– Social engineering. Ex-employees may manipulate current employees using their insider knowledge to gain unauthorised access, often through phishing attacks. 

– Sabotage. Disgruntled former employees might delete important files, corrupt data, or disrupt services, causing operational and financial damage. 

– Legal and compliance risks. Failing to revoke access can lead to breaches of data protection regulations, resulting in legal penalties and reputational damage. 

– Continuity of business operations. Inadequate access control can disrupt business processes, especially if the ex-employee held key roles or knowledge, leading to operational bottlenecks. 

– Financial fraud. Ex-employees with access to financial systems may commit fraud, manipulate accounts, or process unauthorised transactions, impacting the company financially. 

– Loss of customer trust. Compromised customer data due to inadequate offboarding can erode trust, damage the company’s reputation, and lead to business losses and legal actions. 

How Big Is The Problem? 

A 2023 PasswordManager.com (US) survey found that 47 per cent of 1,000 workers admitted to still using their employers’ passwords even after leaving the company, with 58 per cent of them saying this was because the passwords had not changed since they left the company. Interestingly, 44 per cent said someone still working for the company shared it with them! 

Also, a UK government Cyber Security Breaches Survey 2022 revealed that while many UK businesses are aware of the risks, implementation of robust off-boarding procedures remains inconsistent. For example, only 36 per cent of businesses had formal cyber-security policies, and even fewer medium-sized enterprises reviewed these policies regularly. 

Examples 

Some high-profile examples of organisations who have suffered data breaches at the hands of ex-employees include: 

– In 2023, Tesla reported that a significant data breach had been caused by two former employees who leaked personal information of over 75,000 individuals, including employee records and other sensitive data.  

– Also in 2023, a former RAC employee was found guilty of stealing personal data of road traffic accident victims. The ex-employee had accessed and photographed sensitive data, which he later attempted to sell. 

– Back in 2016, broadcasting watchdog Ofcom suffered a large data breach when a former employee downloaded around six years’ worth of third-party data before leaving for a new job at a major broadcaster. The data was then offered to the new broadcaster who informed Ofcom. 

Legal Responsibility 

The examples above highlight one important reason for closing any potential holes in security during an employee exit which is the legal responsibility under current data laws. The United Kingdom General Data Protection Regulation (UK-GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018 (an updated version of the DPA 1998) are the primary legislative frameworks governing how businesses or organisations in the UK should manage the protection and handling of data. Within these frameworks, the data controller (i.e. your company or organisation) holds the responsibility for data matters. 

Protecting this data is crucial not only to safeguard the individuals whose data the company holds but also to protect the company itself from legal penalties, reputational damage, and other consequences. In addition to personal data, businesses must ensure the protection of other sensitive data such as financial records, intellectual property, and details about company security controls. 

Procedure 

These threats and responsibilities demonstrate that businesses and organisations need to address them as part of due diligence. This can be done by developing a built-in company procedure when an employee leaves (offboarding). 

The Checklist 

This company procedure could be built around a checklist / a kind of security audit that covers all the main areas from which leaving employees need to have their access revoked and which plugs any potential loopholes. The checklist could include, for example: 

1. Notification and Planning 

– Inform the IT security team and relevant departments about the employee’s departure, especially if the departure is contentious. 

– Plan the off-boarding process and assign responsibilities. 

2. Email and Communication Management 

Emails are a window into company communications and operations and a place where sensitive data is exchanged and stored. It is also a common ‘vector’ for cyber-criminals. Therefore, Revoke access to company email accounts. 

– Set up auto-forwarding and out-of-office replies with new contact details. 

– Revoke access to other email programs and mass mailing services (e.g. Mailchimp). 

3. Access to Systems and Networks 

Revoke login details and permissions for company computer systems and networks. 

– Disable VPN and remote access accounts. 

4. Customer Relationship Management (CRM) Systems 

– Revoke login access to CRMs containing customer and stakeholder data. 

5. Collaborative Working Apps and Platforms 

– Remove access to cloud-based platforms and collaboration tools (e.g. Teams, Slack). 

– Ensure that the employee cannot access shared working groups. 

6. Two-Factor Authentication (2FA) and Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) 

– Deactivate any 2FA or MFA devices or apps used by the employee. 

7. Privileged Accounts 

– Revoke access to any privileged accounts, including admin rights and root access on servers and databases. 

8. Physical Security Measures

– Retrieve all company-related keys, pass cards, ID cards, parking passes, and similar items. 

– Update physical security systems like alarm codes and biometric access. 

9. Return of Company Assets 

– Ensure the return of all company devices, including laptops, phones, and tablets. 

– Keep a record of which devices were allocated to the employee. 

10. Data and Document Access 

– Retrieve any backup/storage media (e.g. USBs). 

– Transfer or delete any items stored in separate folders on the employee’s computer. 

– Conduct a thorough audit of the employee’s digital footprint within document management systems. 

11. Password Management 

– Change any passwords shared with multiple members of staff. 

– Implement a regular password-changing policy as a fail-safe measure. 

12. Financial Security 

– Change PINs for company credit/debit cards authorised for the employee’s use. 

13. Social Media and Online Presence 

– Remove the employee’s email address and extension from the company website. 

– Update company social media to reflect the departure. 

– Ensure the ex-employee is not featured in the business’s online estate. 

14. Legal and Compliance 

– Ensure the off-boarding process complies with legal and regulatory requirements. 

– Remind the departing employee of their obligations under non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) and data protection laws during the exit interview. 

15. Monitoring and Follow-Up 

– Implement monitoring to detect any unusual activity associated with the former employee’s accounts. 

– Regularly review and update access review processes to adapt to organisational changes. 

16. Customer and Client Notification 

– Notify clients and customers of the change and provide new contact details to ensure continuity. 

17. Physical Document Retrieval 

– Retrieve any physical documents (e.g. handbooks) that could contain sensitive information. 

By following a comprehensive checklist like this one, you can effectively manage the security aspects of employee off-boarding, ensuring that all potential loopholes are addressed, and that the company’s data and resources remain secure. 

BYOD Threat? 

Where companies offer ‘Bring Your Own Device’ (BYOD) meaning that employees can bring in their personally owned laptops, tablets, and smartphones to work and use them to access company information, this could pose an additional level of threat during employee exit.  

This threat may be lessened where companies opt for different types of BYOD such as corporately owned/managed, personally enabled (COPE), choose your own device (CYOD), personally owned and partially enterprise managed or personally owned with managed container application.   

In any case, BYOD should always be accompanied by clear policies and guidance as part of effective management. 

Ex-Employee’s Legal Responsibilities 

It should be remembered that, although the business / organisation has legal responsibilities to protect company data, the ex-employee is also subject to the law for their behaviour. This is of particular importance where an employee, who has dealt with the personal details of others in the course of their work, leaves or retires. For example, the ICO prosecuted a charity worker who, without the knowledge of the data controller (Rochdale Connections Trust), sent emails from his former work email account (2017) containing sensitive personal information of 183 people. Also, a former Council schools admission department apprentice was found guilty of screen-shotting a spreadsheet that contained information about children and eligibility for free school meals and then sending it to a parent via Snapchat. 

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

An effective offboarding procedure is essential to ensure that when employees or contractors leave an organisation, they pose a significantly reduced security risk. Without a proper system in place, departing employees may retain access to sensitive systems and data, which can lead to significant security breaches. This not only endangers the privacy and integrity of company and client information but also exposes the organisation to potential legal liabilities and reputational damage. 

Implementing a comprehensive offboarding checklist is really a matter of due diligence and helps to systematically address all potential vulnerabilities. Such a checklist ensures that all necessary steps are taken to revoke access to company emails, systems, and networks, and to retrieve company assets. By meticulously following these steps, businesses can prevent former employees from inadvertently or maliciously accessing confidential information. 

A well-structured, regularly updated checklist, therefore, facilitates clear communication among various departments involved in the offboarding process, ensuring that no critical task is overlooked. This organised approach can help maintain the continuity and security of business operations, safeguard the company from potential threats and ensure compliance with data protection regulations. A detailed offboarding procedure is a crucial element of any organisation’s overall security strategy, protecting both the company and its stakeholders. 

The post Ex-Employees : Offboarding Checklist appeared first on Mear Technology.

What Is ChatGPT? 

Released by OpenAI in November 2022, ChatGPT is a free, text-based AI Chatbot that can answer questions, write essays seemingly on any subject, tell jokes, write literary parodies, answer complex coding questions, and more. Although, like other chatbots, it generates text based on written prompts, it appears to be more advanced and creative than previous and some rival chatbots. ChatGPT has been “trained” to generate human-like responses to prompts given to it and can be used to build chatbots that can engage in conversation with users in a variety of contexts. This has led to it becoming a viral sensation online. 

Who? 

Some recent online evangelists for the abilities of ChatGPT include Bindu Reddy, CEO of Abacus.AI, Tobias Zwingmann, managing partner of RAPYD.AI (a German consulting firm), and Christopher Potts, a professor at Stanford University. Also, many people have been posting screenshots online of some of the amazing responses and results they’ve got from ChatGPT. 

An Updated Variant of GTP-3 

ChatGPT uses a new variant of GPT-3 (Generative Pre-training Transformer 3), the language processing machine learning model developed by OpenAI which is available as a commercial API for programmers. GPT-3 is a neural network-based model that’s been trained on a massive dataset of text to learn the patterns and structures of human language. This has enabled it to carry out tasks like translation, summarisation, question answering, text generation, and even fine-tuning specific tasks or datasets to improve its performance on those tasks. 

The difference with the GPT-3.5, which is the new variant at the heart of ChatGPT is that it includes additional training data and improvements to the model architecture. These mean that it is better at a variety of language processing tasks, such as taking a naturally phrased question and producing an impressive and natural human-like answer, hence so much positive online interest.  

Additional Training 

According to OpenAI’s blog, the additional ‘training’ that’s helped to take ChatGPT to the next level has been the OpenAI team feeding human-written answers to GPT-3.5 and using a type of simulated reward and punishment called “reinforcement learning” to make ChatGPT produce better quality answers to example questions. 

What Is ChatGPT Best At? 

Some of the things that ChatGPT is particularly good at include: 

• Generating responses to prompts that are appropriate and coherent in the context of a conversation. 
• Using natural language and mimicking human conversational style. 
• Maintaining the continuity of a conversation by being able to remember and use information from previous exchanges 
• Providing general knowledge and answering questions about a wide range of topics 

OpenAI says the dialogue format of ChatGPT enables it to “answer followup questions, admit its mistakes, challenge incorrect premises, and reject inappropriate requests.” 

One caveat, however, is that ChatGPT is a machine learning model, and its performance depends as such on the quality of the data it was trained on and the specific task it is being used for. 

How Do I Try ChatGPT? 

The best way to find out what the fuss about ChatGPT is all about is to try out the beta (free) version. To do so, go to https://chat.openai.com/ and register (name and telephone number for the 2FA code). This results in being directed to ChatGPT where users can see a list of its main, standout capabilities, e.g. remembering previous conversations. Open AI also list some of its main limitations, and examples of the kinds of questions that users may like to try asking it. 

What Businesses Could Make Best Use Of ChatGPT? 

There are a variety of businesses that could potentially make use of ChatGPT or similar chatbot technologies. Some examples of industries that might find ChatGPT useful include: 

• E-commerce: ChatGPT could be used to build chatbots that assist customers with their online shopping experience. For example, ChatGPT could help customers find products, answer questions about product details, or provide recommendations based on their purchase history. 
• Customer service: ChatGPT could be used to build chatbots that handle customer inquiries and complaints, freeing up human customer service representatives to handle more complex or urgent issues. 
• Healthcare: ChatGPT could be used to build chatbots that provide basic healthcare information or triage to users, helping to reduce the burden on healthcare providers and allowing them to focus on more complex cases. 
• Education: ChatGPT could be used to build chatbots that provide tutoring or assistance with homework for students. 
• Financial services: ChatGPT could be used to build chatbots that provide financial advice or assistance with banking tasks. 

Top Three Advantages Over Other Chatbots?

ChatGPT itself sums up its top 3 advantages over other chatbots as: 

1. High quality responses: Because it has been trained on a large dataset of human language, it is able to generate responses that are more human-like and coherent than some other chatbots. This can make it easier for users to communicate with the chatbot and may result in a more pleasant user experience. 
   
2. The ability to handle a wide range of topics: ChatGPT is trained on a diverse dataset and is able to provide information and responses about a wide range of topics. This can make it more versatile and able to handle a broader set of user inquiries compared to chatbots that are only trained on a specific domain or task. 
   
3. Continuity and context awareness: ChatGPT is able to maintain the continuity of a conversation and use information from previous exchanges to provide more contextually relevant responses. This can make it feel more like a natural conversation and may help the chatbot better understand the user’s intentions and needs. 

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

The coherent human-like responses, continuity and contextual awareness, and the sheer diversity of subjects that ChatGPT can write high quality information about (and very quickly) are just some of the main reasons why it is being talked about online in such a positive way.

A powerful chatbot like this has multiple, value-adding applications for many businesses and could deliver cost and time savings, improve efficiency and customer service. As noted above, ChatGPT can also enable businesses to build chatbots, freeing up more of their resources. What’s more, the beta version is currently free. In essence, although this is not the only chatbot available, it is impressive, it could provide advantages and leverage for smaller businesses and is an example of the next phase of chatbots that it’s harder to tell are actually chatbots. The advice would be to give it try and experience it for yourself.

The post Featured Article : What’s All The Fuss About ChatGPT? appeared first on Mear Technology.

Tech Jobs And Skills Gap 

Googe says that this news Interview Warmup tool was developed as part of its own Google Career Certificates programme which offers professional-level online training. The programme was designed to address the problem, as identified by Burning Glass’ Labor Insight, that there are 1.5 million tech job vacancies in the U.S. These jobs are in fast-growing fields like data analytics, digital marketing and e-commerce, IT support, project management and UX design. The Interview Warmup tool is, therefore, an add-on to the training that could provide vital help for those whose tech job applications have reached the interview stage. 

Even though it was developed for Google Career Certificates, the Interview Warmup tool is open to everyone. 

How It Works 

Built in collaboration with job seekers, the Interview Warmup tool lets users practice answering questions selected by industry experts and uses machine learning to transcribe the answers in real time to help the user to discover ways to improve their interview technique.  

Google says: “You’ll also see insights: patterns detected by machine learning that can help you discover things about your answers, like the job-related terms you use and the words you say most often. It can even highlight the different talking points you cover in each answer, so you can see how much time you spend talking about areas like your experience, skills and goals.” 

UK Tech Skills Gap 

Here in the UK, government figures showed that there were 1.2 million job vacancies in the three months to November 2021 and that around 82 per cent of all jobs in the UK list digital skills as a requirement. There’s been a tech skills gap in the UK for many years now which has particularly affected SME’s and, at the same time, new tech industries have been growing, e.g. AI. Back in 2020 the government launched The Skills Toolkit offering free, high-quality digital and numeracy courses. Also, the government’s ‘Levelling Up’ white paper promised that by 2030, the number of people successfully completing high-quality skills training will have increased in every region of the country.  

Skill In Itself 

Although learning the skills for a job are essential, knowing how to come across well in interview is a skill in itself and could provide the competitive advantage that’s vital to gaining employment. It is in this crucial last stage that Google’s new Interview Warmup tool could be of real benefit. 

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

Finding staff with the digital skills that are so important in today’s business environment can be a real challenge, particularly for SMEs. Interviewing provides the opportunity to examine candidates in much more detail and it would be great shame if technically qualified and competent candidates who may well be suited the job were rejected simply because they were less effective in interview situations. The Interview Warmup tool, therefore, has a value both to candidates wanting practice and hone their interview skills, and ultimately for the businesses that need to uncover the relevant information from interview candidates that could lead to employing someone who provides real benefit to the business going forward.

The post Google Offers Job Interview ‘Warmup’ Tool appeared first on Mear Technology.

Vacancies Exceeding Pre-Pandemic Levels

The data, which was compiled by Adzuna and Dealroom for the Government’s Digital Economy Council shows that job vacancies in the digital tech sector have now exceeded pre-pandemic levels and are at their highest level since 2016.

For example, in April 2021 almost 10,000 vacancies for software developers were recorded.  This figure is almost double the number recorded in the same period last year. Also, in May this year, 132,000 tech/digital job vacancies were recorded in a single week.

Increased Demand For Digital Services

The increased demand for digital services created by the pandemic was a key driver in the increase in tech job vacancies.  For example, the pandemic meant that retail, healthcare and other sectors had to rely more on digitisation and many businesses found that they were forced into an accelerated digital transformation.  These factors created greater demand for tech products and services, and this, in turn, increased demand for those who could develop tech products and services.

Big Investment in UK Tech Companies

Another factor driving the rise in UK tech vacancies has been the big increase in the investment in UK tech companies over the last year. For example, as reported by TechNation and Dealroom, despite the global pandemic, there was a record level of venture capital (VC) investment in 2020 into UK tech companies, with investment reaching $15bn. This investment, particularly in London, Oxford, Bristol, Cambridge, and Edinburgh, meant that the UK became the third highest investor in tech globally, behind the US ($144.3bn) and China ($44.6bn).

Start-up Hiring Strong

The investment in tech companies has fuelled tech start-ups which, in turn, has kept start-up hiring resilient, and this has contributed to more tech job vacancies.

Almost A Quarter of Tech Jobs Now Remote

One important pattern in the tech-jobs arena is that almost a quarter (22 percent) are remote. This figure represents a doubling of the figure from the same time last year and is likely to be heavily influenced by a general move to remote working during the pandemic as well as by jobhunters hoping to avoid commuting, together with the uncertainty of office-based work in a changing public health situation. This move to remote working has boosted tech job vacancies outside London, and particularly in the north-west of England (Manchester) and Birmingham.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

Back in 2019, much of the focus was on the challenge of a tech skills gap. Investment through 2020, and the effects on demand for tech skills caused by a surge in demand for digital/tech services during the pandemic have boosted confidence in the industry, boosted vacancies, and changed the geography and nature of tech jobs e.g., away from London and in favour of remote work. The government is, of course, keen to talk-up these increases as evidence of its investment in what now appears to be a booming UK tech sector. For UK businesses, this shift in focus of tech job vacancies should mean that they are more able to fill roles and get their required tech skills from a wider pool of talent around the country, perhaps considering more remote input.

The post Tech News : Five-Year High For Tech Hiring appeared first on Mear Technology.