Reporting archive
Evidence on AI and work
Reporting archive

IBM’s “rebalance” keeps headcount flat while quietly trading legacy roles for AI‑first work to buy margin—and time—on the P&L.

When a pink slip says AI did it, is that technology at work—or a convenient alibi for old-fashioned cost cutting?

LinkedIn quietly flipped default AI training on for public profiles across Europe, Canada, and Hong Kong—tightening the hiring funnel, amplifying lock‑in, and raising hard questions about consent, audits, and bias.

Nadella just rewrote what a ‘hire’ means at Microsoft: add people only where a human-plus-agents system can deliver more than a pre‑AI peer.

The viral ‘scariest chart’ looks like robots versus workers, but the timestamps and sector fingerprints point to tight money—not automation—as the real job killer.

Powell just legitimized AI-driven hiring freezes, warning job creation is “pretty close to zero” even as capex roars—reshaping incentives, labor metrics, and the path of rates.

A benchmark that pays for deliverables found today’s agents can only bill for a sliver of real work—about 2.5%—resetting the automation narrative.

AI just turned “do more with less” into headcount policy—and the new org architects sit in procurement.

AI is gifting teams 1.5 hours a day—and most companies are squandering it in meetings, handoffs, and Slack.

Amazon just turned AI from a productivity slide into a headcount decision—and every board now has cover.