Will AI replace Information technology directors?

Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 69 official task statements scored for Information technology directors (United Kingdom, SOC 1137), 49% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 56 out of 100 (range 50–62, band: partial). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.

Which tasks in “Information technology directors” can AI already do?

The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Document computer security and emergency measures policies, procedures, and tests” (93/100, very high); “Compile reports on project or operational status” (93/100, very high); “Monitor technology systems in real time to detect cyber security incidents, breaches, and intrusions” (83/100, very high). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.

Which tasks in “Information technology directors” stay human?

About 18% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Train staff in specific job roles to enhance performance” (9/100, minimal); “Make staffing decisions to manage IT technical operations” (16/100, minimal); “Solicit cooperation from managers, suppliers, and others” (18/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.

What should someone working in “Information technology directors” do about AI?

Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 49% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 18% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.

How is the AI exposure score for Information technology directors calculated?

Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 69 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.

UK dataswitch to US

Information technology directors

monitoring technology systems in real time to detect cyber security incidents, overseeing IT security measures and recruiting employ, train and supervising staff to maintain IT operations. If that's your week, this page is about your job.

The honest answer

This job is splitting in two: compiling reports on project or operational status is work AI now does quickly and cheaply, and implementing strategic computing initiatives is work it can't touch.

Your move: what you can actually do about this ↓

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 49%
changing shape: 33%
staying human: 18%

These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.

Whole-job exposure score 56 out of 100 (50–62 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, across 69 scored tasks. The number is the support for the sentence above it, not a headline about anyone’s future.

How we know this

What is measured: Every published task statement for information technology directors is rated on five dimensions: can a model produce the output, does the work need a body in a room, does it need a legally accountable person, does it depend on a person being trusted in the moment, and how much data exists. A published formula turns those five ratings into the score; the model never writes the number.

How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.

Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-05. Read the full method.

Which half fills your week decides your exposure. That is more in your control than it sounds.

Your week, as this page understands it

Information technology directors plan, organise, direct and co-ordinate the work and resources necessary to provide and operate IT infrastructure and services, including networks, devices, servers and software that runs on the infrastructure within an organisation. IT programme managers and directors direct and provide technical oversight to particular IT programmes of a discrete duration and/or budget. The job title says “information technology directors”. The real job is the part underneath: implementing strategic computing initiatives. That is the thing someone has to be right about.

The exposed part of this job is specific, and we won’t pretend it is coming back. But information technology directors is not one task. It is 69 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is implementing strategic computing initiatives, and the ledger below shows exactly why.

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 49%
changing shape: 33%
staying human: 18%

These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.

How we know this

How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.

Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-05. Read the full method.

Your job, task by task

These are the official task statements for this occupation, in plain English, sorted by what the evidence says is happening to each one. The official wording sits under every line so you can check the rewrite against it.

40 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.

Shifting to AI

34 tasks

Tasks today’s tools can already do most of. This is the part we will not soften: where these rows are the bulk of your week, the week changes.

Overseeing backup systems for data protection
This is reading one thing and writing another: backup systems in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Oversee backup systems for data protection.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Backup systems largely run and report on themselves already.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Assessing IT processes and technologies for operational efficiency
This is reading one thing and writing another: IT processes in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Assess IT processes and technologies for operational efficiency.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Reviewing processes and technology for efficiency is analysis of records and data software does well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Develop computer information resources for data security and control
This is reading one thing and writing another: computer information resources in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 80 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Develop computer information resources for data security and control.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (68–82 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Building secure information resources follows documented patterns software can produce and a manager can check.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Planning for disaster recovery in information management
This is reading one thing and writing another: disaster recovery in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 80 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Plan for disaster recovery in information management.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Disaster recovery plans follow well-published templates that software can draft.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

Changing shape

21 tasks

Tasks where the machine takes the producing and a person keeps the checking, the deciding, or the answering-for-it. For most jobs this is the biggest group, and it is where "transformation, not termination" is literally visible.

Allocating tasks to systems analysts
The software now makes the first pass at tasks, but the part that matters is a person saying it and standing behind it. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 80 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Allocate tasks to systems analysts, programmers, and other computer-related workers.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 53 out of 100 (46–60 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Allocating work can be planned by software, but who gets what involves knowing the team.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Providing technical assistance to staff for resolving technical issues
The software now makes the first pass at technical assistance, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 80 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Provide technical assistance to staff for resolving technical issues.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 48 out of 100 (41–55 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Many technical problems can be diagnosed and fixed remotely, though some need someone at the machine.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Consulting with users to determine computing needs
The software now makes the first pass at users, but the part that matters is a person saying it and standing behind it. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 85 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Consult with users to determine computing needs.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 40 out of 100 (33–47 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Needs are written up easily; drawing them out of users takes back-and-forth conversation.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

Staying human

14 tasks

Tasks that stay with a person, because they happen in the physical world, because the rules need someone accountable, or because the value is that a specific person does them.

Implementing strategic computing initiatives
The value here is that a specific person handles strategic computing initiatives and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 80 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Implement strategic computing initiatives.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 28 out of 100 (21–35 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Putting a strategy into practice across an organisation depends on influence and follow-through.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Resolving problems with managers, suppliers
The value here is that a specific person handles problems and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 70 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Resolve problems with managers, suppliers, and others.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 18 out of 100 (14–22 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Sorting out disputes with managers and suppliers turns on relationships and give-and-take.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Soliciting cooperation from managers, suppliers
The value here is that a specific person handles cooperation and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 70 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Solicit cooperation from managers, suppliers, and others.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 18 out of 100 (14–22 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Getting cooperation out of other people depends on standing and goodwill.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

Show the other 59 tasks

Documenting computer security and emergency measures policies
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: computer security in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 80 · 1137/01
Source: “Document computer security and emergency measures policies, procedures, and tests.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 93 out of 100 (86–100 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Security policies and procedures follow widely published templates, so software produces strong drafts from the organisation's own setup details.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Compiling reports on project or operational status
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: reports in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 70 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Compile reports on project or operational status.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 93 out of 100 (89–97 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Status reports are written from information already in the systems, which software does well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Monitoring technology systems in real time to detect cyber security incidents
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: technology systems in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 90 · 1137/01
Source: “Monitor technology systems in real time to detect cyber security incidents, breaches, and intrusions.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 83 out of 100 (79–87 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Real-time monitoring for intrusions is already largely automated, with people handling the unusual cases.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Evaluating the results of vulnerability assessments
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: the results of vulnerability assessments in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 1137/01
Source: “Evaluate the results of vulnerability assessments.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 83 out of 100 (79–87 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Reading and prioritising scanner output is well documented and handled well by analysis tools.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Scanning cyberspace to identify and assess potential security threats
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: cyberspace in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 1137/01
Source: “Scan cyberspace to identify and assess potential security threats.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 83 out of 100 (79–87 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Threat scanning uses abundant published sources and automated feeds rather than human searching.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Developing software tools for detecting and preventing security threats
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: software tools in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 80 · 1137/01
Source: “Develop software tools for detecting and preventing security threats.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 83 out of 100 (79–87 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Writing detection tooling is programming, an area where coding assistants are strong.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Writing logical and maintainable software solutions in line with given specifications to meet the design requirements and organisational coding standards
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: logical in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 1137/02
Source: “Write logical and maintainable software solutions in line with given specifications to meet the design requirements and organisational coding standards.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 83 out of 100 (79–87 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Writing maintainable code to a specification and coding standards is exactly what these tools do well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Assessing the quality of security controls using performance indicators
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: the quality of security controls in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 1137/01
Source: “Assess the quality of security controls using performance indicators.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Measuring controls against indicators is data work drawn straight from the organisation’s systems.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Identifying potential system weaknesses to enhance security protocols
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: potential system weaknesses in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 1137/01
Source: “Identify potential system weaknesses to enhance security protocols.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Spotting weaknesses is systematic analysis of configuration and known issues, which tools do quickly.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Organising and conducting regular tests to improve current systems and applications
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: regular tests in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 80 · 1137/01
Source: “Organise and conduct regular tests to improve current systems and applications.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Regular testing is heavily automated already, with people reviewing the results.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Developing emergency management plans for recovery decision making and communications
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: emergency management plans in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 75 · 1137/01
Source: “Develop emergency management plans for recovery decision making and communications.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (68–82 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Emergency plans follow well-established formats software drafts to a usable standard.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Programming computer systems to ensure optimal operation and security
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: computer systems in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 75 · 1137/01
Source: “Programme computer systems to ensure optimal operation and security.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (68–82 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Configuring systems for performance and security is well-documented work with strong tool support.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Examining existing IT systems to assess their efficiency
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: IT systems in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 1137/02
Source: “Examine existing IT systems to assess their efficiency.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Assessing how well existing systems perform uses data these tools read easily, though local context shapes the verdict.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Evaluating and selecting digital products and technologies to improve business efficiency
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: digital products in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 80 · 1137/02
Source: “Evaluate and select digital products and technologies to improve business efficiency.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Comparing products against requirements is well suited to these tools, with a specialist confirming the fit for this business.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Reviewing work plans to schedule specific project activities
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: work plans in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 80 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Review work plans to schedule specific project activities.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (68–82 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Reviewing plans and scheduling activities is planning work software can produce.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Preparing operational budgets for IT and software development projects
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: operational budgets in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 75 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Prepare operational budgets for IT and software development projects.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Budgets are built from figures already in the systems, so drafts come easily.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Preparing work schedules to optimise team productivity
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: work schedules in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 75 · 1137/03
Source: “Prepare work schedules to optimise team productivity.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (68–82 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Building a rota is a scheduling problem software solves, given the team's constraints.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Reviewing performance data to measure productivity and identify areas for improvement
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: performance data in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 70 · 1137/03
Source: “Review performance data to measure productivity and identify areas for improvement.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Reading productivity figures and naming where to improve is analysis software does quickly and clearly.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Analysing data to assess the feasibility of product proposals
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: data in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 50 · 1137/04
Source: “Analyse data to assess the feasibility of product proposals.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Feasibility analysis is data work software can carry out and present.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Training staff on information security standards
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: staff in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 90 · 1137/01
Source: “Train staff on information security standards, policies, and best practices.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 70 out of 100 (66–74 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Security awareness training material is abundantly documented and mostly delivered online already.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Recommending hardware and software upgrades based on assessment
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: hardware in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 80 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Recommend hardware and software upgrades based on assessment.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 70 out of 100 (63–77 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Upgrade recommendations rest on published product information software handles well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Conducting investigations of information security breaches to identify vulnerabilities and assess the damage
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: investigations of information security breaches in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 90 · 1137/01
Source: “Conduct investigations of information security breaches to identify vulnerabilities and assess the damage.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (62–70 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Breach investigation works through logs and system records, which analysis tools sift far faster than people.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Monitoring cyber security compliance as per standards
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: cyber security compliance in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 1137/01
Source: “Monitor cyber security compliance as per standards.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (62–70 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Checking systems against a written standard is exactly the kind of comparison software does well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Reporting and analysing computer network security breaches or attempts
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: computer network security breaches in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 1137/01
Source: “Report and analyse computer network security breaches or attempts.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (62–70 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Breach reporting and analysis is structured writing drawn from logs, with the director accountable for it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Reviewing security assessments for computing environments
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: security assessments in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 80 · 1137/01
Source: “Review security assessments for computing environments.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (62–70 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Reviewing an assessment document is reading and checking against known standards.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Identifying and recommending specific improvements to enhance the effectiveness of security systems
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: specific improvements in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 90 · 1137/01
Source: “Identify and recommend specific improvements to enhance the effectiveness of security systems.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 64 out of 100 (60–68 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Recommending security improvements is analysis and writing against well-documented standards and the organisation’s own data.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Overseeing development of plans to safeguard computer files against unauthorised access
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: development of plans in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 1137/01
Source: “Oversee development of plans to safeguard computer files against unauthorised access.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 64 out of 100 (60–68 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Access protection plans follow documented patterns and can be drafted from the organisation’s own setup.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Budgeting and allocating resources for the delivery of technology solutions
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: resources in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 80 · 1137/02
Source: “Budget and allocate resources for the delivery of technology solutions.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 64 out of 100 (57–71 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Budget and resource plans follow familiar formats tools draft well, though the final call rests with people.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Interpreting organisational policies and procedures to ensure compliance
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: organisational policies in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 75 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Interpret organisational policies and procedures to ensure compliance.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 64 out of 100 (57–71 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Explaining what written policies mean in practice is something software does well from the documents.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Defining specific performance goals and deadlines for the department
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: specific performance goals in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 70 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Define specific performance goals and deadlines for the department.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 64 out of 100 (57–71 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Setting goals and deadlines is planning work software can draft from project data.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Implementing comprehensive security policies
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at comprehensive security policies, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 90 · 1137/01
Source: “Implement comprehensive security policies.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Policies are easy to draft, but putting them into an organisation involves people and existing systems.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Overseeing risk assessments to ensure data processing security
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at risk assessments, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 90 · 1137/01
Source: “Oversee risk assessments to ensure data processing security.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Risk assessments follow documented frameworks, though the director stays answerable for the conclusions.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Designing and maintaining secure network infrastructure solutions
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at secure network infrastructure solutions, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 85 · 1137/02
Source: “Design and maintain secure network infrastructure solutions.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Network design is desk work tools support well, but maintaining live infrastructure sometimes means being on site.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Allocating work to staff to maximise productivity and resource
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at work, but the part that matters is a person saying it and standing behind it. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 85 · 1137/03
Source: “Allocate work to staff to maximise productivity and resource use.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 53 out of 100 (46–60 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Allocating work against skills and capacity is scheduling that software handles well, though people need to accept it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Developing solutions to address information security challenges
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at solutions, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 85 · 1137/01
Source: “Develop solutions to address information security challenges.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 49 out of 100 (42–56 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Solutions can be drafted quickly, but fitting them to a particular estate takes an engineer’s judgement.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Implementing digital technologies to achieve specific organisational objectives
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at digital technologies, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 85 · 1137/02
Source: “Implement digital technologies to achieve specific organisational objectives.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 49 out of 100 (42–56 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Actually putting technology into an organisation involves coordinating people and systems, which tools assist rather than deliver.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Formulating strategies and policies to achieve organisational goals
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at strategies, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 80 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Formulate strategies and policies to achieve organisational goals.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 49 out of 100 (42–56 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Strategy documents can be drafted, though the choices behind them rest on knowing the organisation.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Reviewing and approving new IT programmes for implementation
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at new IT programmes, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 75 · 1137/02
Source: “Review and approve new IT programmes for implementation.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 49 out of 100 (42–56 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: IT programme review works from documented plans and standards, but approving the spend and the risk is the director's own call.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Diagnosing network or connectivity problems for users or user groups
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at network, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 70 · 1137/01
Source: “Diagnose network or connectivity problems for users or user groups.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 48 out of 100 (41–55 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Connectivity faults are diagnosed largely from remote data, though some need someone at the desk or cabinet.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Providing users with technical support for computer problems
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at users, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 75 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Provide users with technical support for computer problems.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 48 out of 100 (41–55 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Common computer problems are already solved through guided help, though some need someone at the desk.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Implementing a recovery plan following a security incident
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at a recovery plan following a security incident, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 80 · 1137/01
Source: “Implement a recovery plan following a security incident.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 43 out of 100 (36–50 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Recovery steps are documented, but carrying them out depends on the specific systems and people involved.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Installing software to safeguard sensitive information
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at software, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 75 · 1137/01
Source: “Install software to safeguard sensitive information.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 43 out of 100 (36–50 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Deployment is largely scripted now, though some installations still need hands on the equipment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Consulting with technicians to specify system requirements
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at technicians, but the part that matters is a person saying it and standing behind it. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 80 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Consult with technicians to specify system requirements.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 40 out of 100 (33–47 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Specifications can be drafted, though pinning them down means talking to the technicians.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Managing daily operations of the department
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at operations of the department, but the part that matters is a person saying it and standing behind it. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 80 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Manage daily operations of the department, including workflow analysis and priority setting.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 40 out of 100 (33–47 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Workflow analysis can be automated, but setting priorities for a team involves knowing the people.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Consulting with suppliers to understand computing solutions
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at suppliers, but the part that matters is a person saying it and standing behind it. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 75 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Consult with suppliers to understand computing solutions.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 40 out of 100 (33–47 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Product information is easy to gather, but supplier conversations shape what is actually on offer.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Establishing requirements for new systems or modifications in consultation with staff
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at requirements, but the part that matters is a person saying it and standing behind it. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 75 · 1137/02, 1137/04
Source: “Establish requirements for new systems or modifications in consultation with staff, users, and management.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 40 out of 100 (33–47 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Requirements are written up easily, but drawing them out of users and managers takes conversation.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Directing daily operations of departments
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at operations of departments, but the part that matters is a person saying it and standing behind it. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 75 · 1137/03
Source: “Direct daily operations of departments, coordinating project activities with other departments.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 40 out of 100 (33–47 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Running a department day to day is largely coordination between colleagues.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Evaluating staff performance
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at staff performance, but the part that matters is a person saying it and standing behind it. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 70 · 1137/03
Source: “Evaluate staff performance.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 40 out of 100 (33–47 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Performance data can be summarised automatically, but appraising someone's work is a conversation between people.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Overseeing IT security operations
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles IT security operations and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 90 · 1137/02
Source: “Oversee IT security operations.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 35 out of 100 (28–42 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Overseeing security operations is mostly directing colleagues and weighing their judgement calls.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Implementing departmental goals and objectives with organisation officials
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles departmental goals and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 80 · 1137/03
Source: “Implement departmental goals and objectives with organisation officials.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 35 out of 100 (28–42 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Goals can be drafted automatically, but agreeing them with senior colleagues is a discussion between people.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Overseeing IT security measures
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles IT security measures and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 85 · 1137/04
Source: “Oversee IT security measures.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 35 out of 100 (28–42 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Overseeing security measures is mostly directing colleagues and judging what they report.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Formulating policies in consultation with the board of directors
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles policies and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 60 · 1137/03
Source: “Formulate policies in consultation with the board of directors.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 24 out of 100 (17–31 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Policy drafts are easy to produce, but board agreement is built through discussion between people.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Recruiting employ, train and supervising staff to maintain IT operations
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles employ, train and supervising staff and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 85 · 1137/02
Source: “Recruit, employ, train, and supervise staff to maintain IT operations.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 21 out of 100 (14–28 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Hiring and developing a team rests on working relationships built with the people involved.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Presenting technology solution plans and proposals to senior stakeholders
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles technology solution plans and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 70 · 1137/02
Source: “Present technology solution plans and proposals to senior stakeholders.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 21 out of 100 (14–28 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: The proposal drafts easily, but presenting to senior stakeholders and answering them is a live performance.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Recruiting employ, train and supervising staff to manage IT technical operations
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles employ, train and supervising staff and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 80 · 1137/04
Source: “Recruit, employ, train, and supervise staff to manage IT technical operations.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 21 out of 100 (14–28 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Recruiting and supervising technical staff depends on relationships with the people being managed.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Leading technology-based business change programs to achieve improved productivity and functionality
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles technology-based business change programs and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 85 · 1137/02
Source: “Lead technology-based business change programs to achieve improved productivity and functionality.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 18 out of 100 (14–22 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Leading a business change programme rests on trust and influence with colleagues, which software cannot carry.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Demonstrating leadership and change management skills to manage technology-driven change
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles leadership and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 75 · 1137/02
Source: “Demonstrate leadership and change management skills to manage technology-driven change.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 18 out of 100 (14–22 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Leading people through change depends on trust built face to face, something software cannot supply.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Making staffing decisions to manage IT technical operations
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles decisions and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 80 · 1137/04
Source: “Make staffing decisions to manage IT technical operations.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 16 out of 100 (9–23 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Staffing decisions rest on knowing the individuals and carrying responsibility for the outcome.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Training staff in specific job roles to enhance performance
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: staff, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 65 · 1137/03
Source: “Train staff in specific job roles to enhance performance.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (5–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Training someone in a job role means showing them at the machine and watching them try.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

What this job pays, and how many people do it

Median pay: £91,700a year, before tax, the middle of the range, so half earn more and half earn less.ashe-t14, 2025 · ASHE 2025 provisional (reference April 2025)Provisional, because the ONS revises this figure in the autumn.
How we know this
Source: ashe-t14
Reference period: ASHE 2025 provisional (reference April 2025)
Rounding: Shown to the nearest £100. The exact published figure is in the downloadable dataset. We do not render pounds the survey cannot support.
People doing this job: 197,000in the UK, 2026.nomis-aps · Apr 2025-Mar 2026 (latest APS 12-month period)This headcount comes from a survey, not a census, so treat it as a good estimate rather than an exact count.

What is deliberately not here: a forecast of how many of these jobs exist in ten years. Where an official projection exists for a market we publish it with its vintage; where it does not, we leave the space empty rather than borrow the other country’s number.

Why this is shifting

The reason is boringly specific. Most of what is shifting here is reading one thing and writing another: backup systems in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: compiling reports on project or operational status and overseeing backup systems for data protection. What it cannot do is be trusted in person, which is what strategic computing initiatives run on: someone specific doing it and standing behind it. Which is why this page talks about your tasks changing, not your job ending.

Your move

Over a pint: what I’d tell you if you were my friend

The exposed part of your job is the biggest part, and I am not going to dress that up: compiling reports on project or operational status is work today's tools do quickly and cheaply, and that is not coming back.

So, given all that: 49% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 33% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 18% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 69 scored tasks. It is not a forecast about you.

What you have that the software does not is implementing strategic computing initiatives, plus the years of knowing when something looks wrong before you can say why. That is the raw material for everything below.

This week: one thing

Sit on the machine's side of the desk. Pick one real piece of backup systems you would normally do yourself, let whatever software you already have take the first pass at it, and then go through what it produced and write down every single thing it got wrong. One evening this week. Do not fix anything yet. Just catch it.

What you end up holding: a written list of the machine’s mistakes, in your handwriting
How long it takes: an evening, or an hour if you pick one job rather than one client

If you can’t run software on your employer’s or your clients’ data: Do the same hunt on paper. Take one printed piece of backup systems, work through it the way you always do, and mark every point where you made a call rather than followed a rule. Same evening, same list, nothing to log into and nobody to ask permission from. That list is the same artifact: it is the judgment written down.

Over the next 90 days

Change one sentence about what you do. Not on a CV. Out loud, to whoever pays you. From “my job is compiling reports on project or operational status” to “I check what the software does and tell you what it means.” Your error list from this week is what makes that sentence true instead of a claim, so use it: show it once, to one person, inside the next ninety days. Same skills, priced as judgment rather than as typing.

Over the next 12 months

Walk toward the end of this job that answers for things, and get it recognised. Pick the one part of implementing strategic computing initiatives you are already best at, and spend the year making it formal: a qualification, a named responsibility, a specialism people ask for by name. Price it honestly: that is evenings, it is months rather than weeks, and the seats are competitive because everyone in your position is looking at the same door. Before you pay for anything, spend an hour with National Careers Service. It is free and government-funded, and it is listed below with the rest of the free routes.

The roads out of here, and why I am not sending you down them

I looked at the obvious moves out of this job, and here is what I found.

I checked the 12 nearest UK occupations to information technology directors (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was health services and public health managers and directors: only about 11% of its durable work is work you already do and it pays 32.8% less. Your own job splits about 49/51: that share of the list sits in the top exposure band and the rest does not. On this evidence the honest move is inside the job rather than out of it. Become the person who owns “implement comprehensive security policies”, and let the exposed end go.

How that was checked: this job was compared against all 412 UK occupations in this release on their official task statements, and the 12 nearest were examined one by one. A move that turns on an industry, an employer or a qualification rather than on the work itself will not show up in a check like that. And this release carries no licence register, so anything you are weighing needs that looked up separately.

3 moves I checked and rejected

These are the obvious-looking jumps. They are here with their reasons rather than quietly dropped, because the ones that fail are worth knowing about. It is one less thing to turn over at night.

Health services and public health managers and directors
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already recruit, employ, train, and supervise staff to maintain IT operations, and their equivalent is to recruit, employ, train, and supervise staff to ensure clinical governance. Across both published task lists that is about 11% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: You would be starting most of it from nothing: about 11% of the durable work in that job is work you do today, and the rest you would be learning while the bills carried on. It is a pay cut, in those words: £61,573 against your £91,671, 32.8% less (ASHE Table 14.7a, 2025 provisional (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Cyber security professionals
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour because one of your tasks is on their list in the same words: “develop solutions to address information security challenges”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 9% of the work in that job the software is not taking.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 9% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. It is a pay cut, in those words: £54,647 against your £91,671, 40.4% less (ASHE Table 14.7a, 2025 provisional (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
IT managers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already recruit, employ, train, and supervise staff to maintain IT operations, and their equivalent is to recruit, employ, train, and supervise staff to maintain IT systems. Across both published task lists that is about 8% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 8% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. It is a pay cut, in those words: £56,438 against your £91,671, 38.4% less (ASHE Table 14.7a, 2025 provisional (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
Look at that job’s page anyway →

What I’d stop worrying about

A friend tells you what not to spend fear on. This is that list.

The headline number you read somewhere
The big “X% of jobs” figures are about the whole economy, not about you. The number that describes your job is on this page: 49% of its task weight, across 69 scored tasks. Every row behind it is printed above with the source. Check ours; ignore theirs.
“It’s too late for me to become something else”
You are not starting from zero, and the page shows why: implementing strategic computing initiatives is work the software cannot do and you already do it. The move above is a repricing of what you know, not a new career. Nobody who has just left college has that.
“I should learn to code”
Almost certainly not. The value in your job is moving toward checking, deciding and answering for the output, not toward writing the software. A weekend of Python will not change your position; the error list from this week will.
The “obvious” next job everyone suggests
I checked the obvious moves and most of them did not survive. The reasons are printed with the routes above, including the pay and the gate. A move that fails on the numbers is worth knowing about so you can stop turning it over at night.

If you run a team doing this job

If you run a team doing this job, the conversation you owe them is the one on this page, and sooner than feels comfortable. Show them the ledger rather than a reassurance: the rows moving toward the software are compiling reports on project or operational status, and the rows that are not are where you want your people visible. Ask each of them to do the this-week move and bring the list to your next one-to-one. It turns a rumour into a piece of work, and it tells you which parts of your team's week are actually at stake. And say the thing out loud that a team lead usually leaves unsaid: a shrinking team is your exposure too, so do the move yourself as well.

You are reading the United Kingdom figures

The United States splits this work across more than one official group, of which Computer and Information Systems Managers is the closest. The pay and employment figures are not directly comparable, and we do not average them together.

Switch to the United States page →partial match

In US official statistics this job is counted as Computer and Information Systems Managers. Pay and employment stay on this page’s own group; the task list and the scores do not cross over.

Your route through this

Two honest options, and no deadline on either

Free, and complete

The moves above cost nothing. These are the real services that go with them: public, government-funded, and free at the point of use. Nothing on this page is behind an email address or a payment.

In England:
National Careers Service
A free hour with a government-funded careers adviser is worth more than another evening of reading. In England that's the National Careers Service.
Free, government-funded
- Discover your skills and careers (the skills assessment)
In England:
National Careers Service - Find a course
Search what's actually running near you before you spend anything.
Free to search; individual courses vary
In England:
Free courses for jobs (Level 3 qualifications)
A free Level 3 qualification you already qualify for beats a paid course you don't need.
Free for eligible adults
In England:
Skills Bootcamps
Free, up to 16 weeks, and you get a job interview at the end. In England these are Skills Bootcamps - search what's running near you.
Free for eligible adults in England
- Skills Bootcamps - what they are and who can do them (DfE, Skills for Careers)
- Skills Bootcamps - JobHelp (DWP)
In Scotland:
My World of Work (Skills Development Scotland)
In Scotland it's My World of Work, from Skills Development Scotland.
Free, publicly funded
- Skills Development Scotland
In Wales:
Careers Wales
In Wales it's Careers Wales.
Free, Welsh Government-funded
In Northern Ireland:
Careers Service Northern Ireland
In Northern Ireland it's the Careers Service on nidirect.
Free, Department for the Economy-funded

A nearby route

There's no Space built for IT directors yet.

Collab365 Spaces is built by the same people as this site. We find the problems that AI and automation are creating inside one kind of work, then solve them as short courses, briefings and Blueprints. Each Space is the community too, so the research and the people doing your job are in the same place.

What a Space actually is, in full

The closest match is SharePoint & Teams Admins, a community for the small IT teams who own Teams, SharePoint, OneDrive and permissions, usually one to three people. It overlaps with the part of your job that is growing: the practical Microsoft 365 governance a small team can actually sustain. It is written for one-to-three-person IT teams, not for large IT organisations. If that overlap isn't you, the free route below covers the same ground.

Try SharePoint & Teams Admins free →

7 days free, no card needed. Explore up to 2 Spaces before you choose a plan: you pick a plan later, not now.

After the trial it is a paid community, and you get identical data either way. If the overlap above is not your job, the moves above cost nothing and stand on their own.

Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for IT directors launches. Nothing else.

That did not look like an email address, so nothing was saved. Have another go below.

We could not save that. The fault is ours, not yours, and your address was not stored. Please try again later.

No deadline on any of this. The page will still be here, and the data is refreshed on a published schedule rather than when someone wants a headline.

Questions people ask about this job

Will AI replace Information technology directors?: Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 69 official task statements scored for Information technology directors (United Kingdom, SOC 1137), 49% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 56 out of 100 (range 50–62, band: partial). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.
Which tasks in “Information technology directors” can AI already do?: The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Document computer security and emergency measures policies, procedures, and tests” (93/100, very high); “Compile reports on project or operational status” (93/100, very high); “Monitor technology systems in real time to detect cyber security incidents, breaches, and intrusions” (83/100, very high). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.
Which tasks in “Information technology directors” stay human?: About 18% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Train staff in specific job roles to enhance performance” (9/100, minimal); “Make staffing decisions to manage IT technical operations” (16/100, minimal); “Solicit cooperation from managers, suppliers, and others” (18/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.
What should someone working in “Information technology directors” do about AI?: Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 49% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 18% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.
How is the AI exposure score for Information technology directors calculated?: Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 69 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.

Where these numbers come from

About the data on this page

Provisional, because the ONS revises this figure in the autumn.
This headcount comes from a survey, not a census, so treat it as a good estimate rather than an exact count.
The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
40 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.

Task statements: gaisi-indexProcessing: catalogue-bridge → ssc-relatedness-weighting → task-scoring → score-aggregation
Task weights: gaisi-index (relatedness)
Scores: Rubric task_scoring_v1.0, model claude-opus-5, computed 2026-08-05.
Pay and employment: ashe-t14 (ASHE 2025 provisional (reference April 2025))nomis-aps (Apr 2025-Mar 2026 (latest APS 12-month period))

Figures on this page come from release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Every release keeps its own permanent address, so a figure you cite in March is still there, unchanged, in November.

The plain-English wording on this page is assembled directly from the task statements and the published ratings, not written by hand for this occupation. That is why it is specific, and it is also why we say so.

The routes and free resources further up are today’s, not the release’s (last reviewed 2026-08-05). A route is an offer, not a historical fact, so it moves on its own clock.

How we score a job Download this release Look up another job

Using these figures?

Cite this

Everything on this site is published under CC BY 4.0. Quote it, chart it, sell something built on it. Just say where it came from, and cite the dated release rather than the site, so the figure you quote stays checkable.

Plain text

Collab365 (2026). Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1 (methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0). https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1. Licensed CC BY 4.0. Built with O*NET data (USDOL/ETA, CC BY 4.0); ONS data (Open Government Licence v3.0); GAISI task framework (arXiv:2507.22748, MIT); BLS data (public domain).

BibTeX

@misc{collab365futureproof2026q41,
  title        = {Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1},
  author       = {{Collab365}},
  year         = {2026},
  url          = {https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1},
  note         = {Release 2026-q4.1, methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0, CC BY 4.0}
}

Permalink

https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1

Data as of release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Releases never change after publication; when the figures move, a new dated release is published beside this one and this one stays exactly where it is.