US dataswitch to UK
Civil Engineering Technologists and Technicians
calculating dimensions, square footage, conducting materials test and analysis and developing plans and estimating costs for installation of systems. If that's your week, this page is about your job.
The honest answer
AI is already taking a real slice of the routine work here: preparing reports and documenting project activities and data. That is a slice of tasks, not of you.
That slice is not coming back; the core of the job, conferring with supervisor to determine project details, stays yours. The tools change hands, the accountability doesn't.
Your week, as this page understands it
Apply theory and principles of civil engineering in planning, designing, and overseeing construction and maintenance of structures and facilities under the direction of engineering staff or physical scientists. The job title says “civil engineering technologists” or “technicians”: officially one job, two names. The real job is the part underneath: conferring with supervisor to determine project details. 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 civil engineering technologists and technicians is not one task. It is 14 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is conferring with supervisor to determine project details, and the ledger below shows exactly why.
Where the work sits, by task weight
- shifting to AI
- 32%
- changing shape
- 30%
- staying human
- 38%
These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.
Whole-job exposure score 43 out of 100 (37–50 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, across 14 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 civil engineering technologists and technicians 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.
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.
- 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
4 tasksTasks 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.
Calculating dimensions, square footage, profile and component specifications and material quantities, using calculator or computer
This is reading one thing and writing another: dimensions, square footage in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Calculate dimensions, square footage, profile and component specifications, and material quantities, using calculator or computer.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (59–73 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: Working out quantities and dimensions from project files is calculation work software handles well, with an engineer checking the result.
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.
Preparing reports and documenting project activities and data
This is reading one thing and writing another: reports in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Prepare reports and document project activities and data.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 81 out of 100 (77–85 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 up project activity and data from existing records is exactly the kind of report software now drafts to a usable standard.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · 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.
Analyzing proposed site factors and designing maps
This is reading one thing and writing another: proposed site factors in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Analyze proposed site factors and design maps, graphs, tracings, and diagrams to illustrate findings.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (59–73 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: Turning site data into maps, charts and diagrams suits software well, with an engineer confirming what the findings actually mean.
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.
Developing project budgets by estimating the cost of project activities
This is reading one thing and writing another: project budgets in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Develop project budgets by estimating the cost of project activities.” (O*NET 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 budget from a list of project activities is spreadsheet work that software does quickly and accurately.
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
4 tasksTasks 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.
Reading and reviewing project blueprints and structural specifications to determine dimensions of structure or system and material requirements
The software now makes the first pass at project blueprints, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Read and review project blueprints and structural specifications to determine dimensions of structure or system and material requirements.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 50 out of 100 (43–57 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: Pulling dimensions and material needs out of construction drawings can be done on screen, but reading those drawings reliably still trips software up.
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 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Drafting detailed dimensional drawings and designing layouts for projects to ensure conformance to specifications
The software now makes the first pass at detailed dimensional drawings, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Draft detailed dimensional drawings and design layouts for projects to ensure conformance to specifications.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 50 out of 100 (43–57 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: Software can start a layout, but turning it into drawings that match the specification still takes a person working in the drafting package.
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 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Developing plans and estimating costs for installation of systems
The software now makes the first pass at plans, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Develop plans and estimate costs for installation of systems, utilization of facilities, or construction of structures.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 59 out of 100 (52–66 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Plans and cost estimates can be drafted from standard data, though local prices and site quirks still need a person familiar with them.
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 2/4.
Staying human
6 tasksTasks 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.
Conferring with supervisor to determine project details
The value here is that a specific person handles supervisor and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Confer with supervisor to determine project details such as plan preparation, acceptance testing, and evaluation of field conditions.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 23 out of 100 (16–30 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: This is a working conversation with a supervisor, so the value sits in the back-and-forth rather than in anything a computer writes.
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 2/4.
Inspecting project site and evaluating contractor work to detect design malfunctions and ensure conformance to design specifications and applicable codes
This work happens in the physical world: project site, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Inspect project site and evaluate contractor work to detect design malfunctions and ensure conformance to design specifications and applicable codes.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 7 out of 100 (3–11 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Checking built work against the design means walking the site and looking at the actual construction.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Planning and conducting field surveys to locate new sites and analyze details of project sites
This work happens in the physical world: field surveys, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Plan and conduct field surveys to locate new sites and analyze details of project sites.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 7 out of 100 (3–11 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Field surveys mean going to the site with instruments and recording what is actually there.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Show the other 4 tasks
Responding to public suggestions and complaints
changing shapeThe software now makes the first pass at public suggestions, 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 4 · SupplementalSource: “Respond to public suggestions and complaints.” (O*NET 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: Replies can be drafted well, but a complaint often needs a person on the other end to make the answer land.
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.
Negotiating with contractors on prices for new contracts or modifications to existing contracts
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles contractors and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Negotiate with contractors on prices for new contracts or modifications to existing contracts.” (O*NET 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: Price negotiation with contractors turns on the relationship and what each side is willing to concede in the moment.
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.
Reporting maintenance problems occurring at project site to supervisor and negotiating changes to resolve system conflicts
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: maintenance problems, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · CoreSource: “Report maintenance problems occurring at project site to supervisor and negotiate changes to resolve system conflicts.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 11 out of 100 (4–18 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium 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: Spotting the problem means being at the site, and resolving it depends on talking changes through with the supervisor.
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 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Conducting materials test and analysis
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: materials test, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Conduct materials test and analysis, using tools and equipment and applying engineering knowledge.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 7 out of 100 (3–11 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Materials testing needs someone handling samples and equipment in a lab or on site.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
What this job pays, and how many people do it
- Median pay
- $64,950a year, the middle of the range, so half earn more and half earn less.bls-oews, 2025 · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
How we know this
Source: bls-oews
Reference period: May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
Rounding: Shown as published.
- People doing this job
- 68,520in the US, 2025.bls-oews · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
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: dimensions, square footage in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: preparing reports and documenting project activities and data and calculating dimensions, square footage. What it cannot do is be trusted in person, which is what supervisor runs 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
Your week is splitting in two, and which half fills it is the whole question. Preparing reports and documenting project activities and data is going; conferring with supervisor to determine project details is not.
So, given all that: 32% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 30% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 38% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 14 scored tasks. It is not a forecast about you.
The occupation is an average and you are not, so the first job below is finding out where your own week actually sits.
This week: one thing
Print the task ledger above and put your own hours next to each row. Roughly, in pen, in one sitting. Then look at which group your hours actually pile up in. Twenty minutes, this week.
- What you end up holding
- your own week, on one page, sorted into what is shifting and what is not
- How long it takes
- about twenty minutes
If printing it isn’t practical: Read the rows off this page and write the same list on the back of an envelope. Same twenty minutes, same page, and it works just as well said out loud to someone who knows the job. The point is your hours next to the rows, not the paper it is on.
Over the next 90 days
Volunteer toward the durable end, visibly. Over the next ninety days put your hand up for the work in the bottom group (conferring with supervisor to determine project details) and let people see you doing it. Not a new project: the same job, with your mix deliberately tilted. The point is that when the rota or the reorganisation comes, the version of you people picture is the one doing the part that stays.
Over the next 12 months
Claim a specialism at the durable end and let the other end go. Over a year, deliberately become the person who handles conferring with supervisor to determine project details, and deliberately stop being the first choice for the rows in the top group. That trade costs something, because the exposed work is often the comfortable work. Decide it on purpose rather than by drift. Before you pay for anything, use CareerOneStop - Find local training. It is free, it is the Labor Department's own service, 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 US occupations to civil engineering technologists and technicians (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was first-line supervisors of construction trades and extraction workers: only about 3% of its durable work is work you already do. Your own job splits about 32/68: 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 “confer with supervisor to determine project details”, and let the exposed end go.
How that was checked: this job was compared against all 830 US 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.
First-Line Supervisors of Construction Trades and Extraction Workers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already prepare reports and document project activities and data, and their equivalent is to coordinate work activities with other construction project activities. Across both published task lists that is about 3% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 3% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
Construction Managers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already develop plans and estimate costs for installation of systems, utilization of facilities, or…, and their equivalent is to plan, organize, or direct activities concerned with the construction or maintenance of structures…. Across both published task lists that is about 3% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 3% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
Electrical Engineers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already develop project budgets by estimating the cost of project activities, and their equivalent is to oversee project production efforts to assure projects are completed on time and within…. Across both published task lists that is about 2% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 2% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
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: 32% of its task weight, across 14 scored tasks. Every row behind it is printed above with the source. Check ours; ignore theirs.
The whole-job doom story
Nothing on this page says this job ends. It says the mix inside it moves. Half the rows above are unchanged or changing shape, and the plan is about which half your week sits in. That is a very different problem, and a solvable one.
Panic-buying a course
Do the twenty-minute sorting exercise first. Most people who buy a course before they have done it buy the wrong one, and the free services listed below will tell you the same thing without charging for it.
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.
You are reading the United States figures
The United Kingdom splits this work across more than one official group, of which Building and civil engineering technicians is the closest. The pay and employment figures are not directly comparable, and we do not average them together.
Switch to the United Kingdom page →partial match
In UK official statistics this job is counted as Building and civil engineering technicians. Pay and employment stay on this page’s own group; the task list and the scores do not cross over.
Your route through this
Where to go next, and what it costs
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.
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Find local training
Search what's running near you, from the Labor Department's own database, before anyone sells you a course.
Free to search; individual programs vary, and some are funded
Anywhere in the US:
An American Job Center will sit down with you for free. Find yours by ZIP code.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Licensed occupations finder
Check what your state actually requires before you pay for anything.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
Free
No Space for this job, but one for what is happening to it
Nothing Collab365 runs is built for civil engineering technologists / technicians, and we are not going to point you at the nearest one and call it a fit.
There is one that is not about a job title at all. The AI Authority is about being the person who directs these tools at work rather than the person they get compared to. That is worth saying here, because 32% of the work on this page is already inside what they can do.
7 days free, no card needed. Explore up to 2 Spaces before you choose a plan: you pick a plan later, not now.
The AI Authority is a general community about working with AI, not a course for civil engineering technologists / technicians. You do not need it to act on anything here: the moves above cost nothing and stand on their own. The data on this page is the same either way.
Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for civil engineering technologists / technicians 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 Civil Engineering Technologists and Technicians?
- Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 14 official task statements scored for Civil Engineering Technologists and Technicians (United States, SOC 17-3022), 32% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 43 out of 100 (range 37–50, 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 “Civil Engineering Technologists and Technicians” can AI already do?
- The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Prepare reports and document project activities and data” (81/100, very high); “Develop project budgets by estimating the cost of project activities” (75/100, high); “Calculate dimensions, square footage, profile and component specifications, and material quantities, using calculator or computer” (66/100, 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 “Civil Engineering Technologists and Technicians” stay human?
- About 38% 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: “Conduct materials test and analysis, using tools and equipment and applying engineering knowledge” (7/100, minimal); “Plan and conduct field surveys to locate new sites and analyze details of project sites” (7/100, minimal); “Inspect project site and evaluate contractor work to detect design malfunctions and ensure conformance to design specifications and applicable codes” (7/100, 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 “Civil Engineering Technologists and Technicians” do about AI?
- Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 32% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 38% 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 Civil Engineering Technologists and Technicians 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 14 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
Worth knowing about these figures
- The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
- 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
- onet-dbProcessing: catalogue-bridge → onet-im-rt-weighting → task-scoring → score-aggregation
- Task weights
- onet-db (im-rt)
- Scores
- Rubric task_scoring_v1.0, model claude-opus-5, computed 2026-08-05.
- Pay and employment
- bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))
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.
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}
}Data as of release 2026-q4.1, published . 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.