AI will create more jobs than it destroys

When a technology makes workers more productive, it makes their labor more valuable, not less, lowering costs, expanding what a firm can attempt, and creating demand for work nobody had imagined.

The doomsday case rests on a flawed arithmetic: If AI can do 40 percent of a job’s tasks, then 40 percent of the work must go. But a job is not a to-do list of separable chores. Firms employ people for bundles of work held together by judgment, coordination, client trust and acco…

AI creates value. Value creates growth. And growth creates demand for new kinds of work.

Across the global economy, we’re beginning to see a new divide emerge between different models for talent and value creation. The companies seeing the greatest returns on AI are using it to amplify human expertise, accelerate innovation and create entirely new sources of value. A…

The companies winning this transition aren't replacing workers with AI, they're multiplying human judgment at scale.

Companies most able to use AI are seeing faster headcount growth than the least AI-exposed companies (52% vs 36%) and higher wage growth (24% vs 17%).

Companies making significant investments in AI grew their workforces faster than comparable firms. The findings counter predictions that AI adoption will lead to broad job loss.

AI adoption has not yet resulted in widespread job loss but instead is associated with productivity gains and employment growth in high-exposure occupations.

The 1,640 IT decision-makers Box surveyed for our 2026 State of AI in the Enterprise report reveal what’s actually happening: 58% expect their organization's total headcount to rise over the next three years. Of the most mature companies in terms of AI adoption, that number rises…

Despite concerns of AI-driven job losses, a new study from JLL finds that a majority of senior business leaders expect their workforces to grow (60%), not shrink (40%) – similarly, most expect AI to reinvent human roles (60%), rather than replace them (40%).

Will A.I. disrupt the labor market? Absolutely. The United States has a long track record of creating new jobs in response to disruption, from the electrification of the 1900s to the digital revolution of the 1990s.

Technology doesn’t kill jobs. It kills professions. Every technological revolution destroys certain professions but creates entirely new ones. We tend to focus on what’s being destroyed rather than what’s being created.

Virtually every major technology wave in history has ultimately created more opportunities than it destroyed. The internet gave rise to roles that simply didn’t exist in 1995. AI is doing the same thing right now. New roles like AI trainers, agent specialists, AI security experts…

Our data shows AI is reshaping work at the task level, creating new job categories even as it changes others. Whether a Fortune 500 company or small local business, this is a critical time for employers to focus on upskilling today’s workers and preparing their organizations for …

Ninety-four percent of HR leaders believe AI will generate new entry-level roles that do not yet exist. The opportunity to expand access to leadership development is genuine but only if organizations move forward with intention rather than assumption.

Artificial intelligence will create jobs in both the short and long term, though the medium-term impact on employment could be disruptive.

Even as Artificial Intelligence displaces a significant number of roles in the United Kingdom, it’s clear the net-positive impact on the job market remains favorable.

We do expect that ultimately there are going to be more than enough jobs created to reabsorb workers back into the labor market.

Some people will lose jobs. But many new jobs will be created. [...] There will be more jobs.

I believe AI will create new jobs and industries over time, but the transition could be disruptive, and it’s already underway. We shouldn’t fearmonger, but we can’t pretend our training and worker support systems are ready, either.

Because of the benefits and efficiencies of Agentforce, we’ve seen the number of support cases we handle decline and we no longer need to actively backfill support engineer roles.

The adoption and deployment of AI technologies across our operations have resulted, and may continue to result, in reductions to our workforce.

Businesses that report using AI to improve business operations are more likely to report reductions in workforce headcount than those using AI for other purposes.

Productivity can just as easily mean businesses doing the same work with fewer people.

engineers use AI to ship in days what used to take a team weeks.

Firms are hiring fewer junior workers because AI now handles the routine work that once trained future experts, quietly draining the pipeline that produces senior judgment.

This generation of capable workers is being squeezed out right when companies will need them most.

Remove the entry point, and a company may look more efficient for a few quarters, but its talent is at risk of becoming frozen at precisely the moment it needs to evolve fastest.

AI is therefore replacing existing workers, while simultaneously shutting them out from moving to other industries.

In the long run, it may just be both instead of one or the other: both forces that are making it harder and harder for people to get jobs initially and also ramp up in their career going forward.

There will be some new jobs, but without the right policies there will be far fewer than exist today.

AI is likely to lift productivity across the board but could have a severe disruptive effect on employment, worsening the employment growth problem and resulting in a detrimental effect on social stability.

Good AI needs to complement humans, and this requires a redirection, because the current focus on AGI is, in all but name, an agenda for displacing humans from meaningful work.

Without these investments, AI risks widening inequality, displacing workers and shifting wealth from labour to capital rather than creating sustainable good jobs – those with fair compensation, worker autonomy and a reliable path to social dignity.

As AI takes over their current work, most workers will probably get poorer or have to take additional jobs to maintain their current pay. [...] AI will make most of us poorer and a few fabulously wealthy — unless its productivity gains are allocated fairly.

For now, it seems likely that AI will reshape jobs rather than eliminate them. AI is unlikely to perform all job tasks, even in occupations exposed to AI. Yet we cannot be complacent. Transformative technologies always have winners and losers, and one lesson of trade liberalizati…

The only meaningful guardrails around workplace AI are happening at the bargaining table, where workers are showing up and demanding protections.

We also need the Government to introduce a raft of measures to manage AI-driven changes to work. Those measures should include an employment levy on companies that replace large numbers of workers with AI, training subsidies for displaced workers, redeployment programmes to move …

My Lords, I am concerned about the adverse effect that AI is having on employment in the creative sector.

But from me, from my version, definitely from the communities which we are coming from, the employment is often taken away because of AI from our people, which is a reality.

When we look at the evidence today specifically around AI reducing employment, at the moment there is quite inconclusive evidence about whether AI equals a significant reduction in employment.

But of course, new jobs and new tasks are also going to be created. And that balance between the jobs going away and new jobs being created, we really don't know.

The first thing to say is that the capabilities of AI are rising faster than expected, and the evidence on how that is translating into fundamental changes in labour-market demand, in employer behaviour, in productivity, is actually quite limited and contradictory.

Workers should not have to guess how artificial intelligence is affecting their jobs or their futures. As I outlined in my report last year on AI's impact on American jobs, Congress needs reliable data to better understand these changes. We need to know where jobs are being lost,…

We need to think a lot harder about what jobs are, how they will evolve, and that will help us give advice to people about labor-market trends rather than being optimistic or pessimistic.

Increasing use of information technology (IT), including artificial intelligence (AI), will boost demand for workers in some occupations over the 2024–34 decade, while other occupations may see their numbers decrease.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is having a profound impact on the UK economy and labour market, but the speed of adoption and exactly how it will affect employment is still uncertain. AI is likely to automate or augment aspects of many occupations, changing task composition and pro…

I think both outcomes are likely to occur depending on the industry.

AI is going to reshape the world of work, with some jobs more impacted than others, but AI will also create new roles and opportunities.

What’s missing at this inflection point is a framework that gets us beyond narrow debates or silver-bullet thinking, recognizing that AI’s impacts will be unevenly felt across industries, types of workers, and regions.

There is no evidence to date of broad AI-driven labour-market upheaval in Australia. Overall labour market conditions remain strong by historical standards, youth outcomes have mostly held up, and occupational reshuffling has not accelerated. However, occupations more exposed to …

95% of firms that are using AI have reported no change in their headcount, and 86% using AI report no change in the nature of the jobs they are doing. It looks more like we are seeing augmentation at the moment rather than a general transformation of the workplace.

Right now, we are not seeing evidence of large-scale AI-related layoffs in California's labor market. But we do see patterns in certain regions like the Bay Area, in certain tech-heavy sectors, and among highly AI-exposed workers with college degrees. It will be important to cont…

Increasingly, their jobs are being automated by AI and generative AI. They are often being redeployed, but they are reporting that their jobs still need to be done because there is a lot of work that goes into them that is not automatable.

Harnessing the benefits of GenAI requires more than access to technology. Productivity gains depend on investments in human capital and social protection. Ultimately, future labour market outcomes will depend less on exposure alone than on the policy choices to build the prepared…

Decisions made now about training, skills development, job design and inclusion will shape whether AI expands participation or quietly narrows it.

By investing in AI education and workforce training through the Tech Talent Accelerator, we are strengthening our talent pipeline, supporting Connecticut businesses, and creating opportunities for everyone to secure high-quality, good-paying jobs.

Labour market economists have long demonstrated that the amount of work in the economy is not fixed, and that labour market adjustments can create more jobs. Yet this ‘lump of labour fallacy’ is still applied to debates about technological innovation. We agree that AI may produce…

In the future, it is true that there is a scenario in which there is mass unemployment. But it is also true that when there have been huge upheavals previously, labour markets have adapted, albeit over time, and sometimes it is that gap that makes the difference.