Will AI replace Computer Systems Analysts?

Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 39 official task statements scored for Computer Systems Analysts (United States, SOC 15-1211), 58% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 58 out of 100 (range 53–64, 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 “Computer Systems Analysts” can AI already do?

The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Read manuals, periodicals, and technical reports to learn how to develop programs that meet staff and user requirements” (100/100, very high); “Review and analyze computer printouts and performance indicators to locate code problems, and correct errors by correcting codes” (93/100, very high); “Use object-oriented programming languages, as well as client and server applications development processes and multimedia and Internet technology” (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 “Computer Systems Analysts” stay human?

About 22% 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: “Plan, install, repair, or troubleshoot telehealth technology applications or systems in homes” (12/100, minimal); “Supervise computer programmers or other systems analysts or serve as project leaders for particular systems projects” (18/100, minimal); “Interview or survey workers, observe job performance, or perform the job to determine what information is processed and how it is processed” (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 “Computer Systems Analysts” do about AI?

Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 58% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 22% 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 Computer Systems Analysts 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 39 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.

US dataswitch to UK

Computer Systems Analysts

translating nursing practice information between nurses and systems engineers, analyzing computer and information technologies to determine applicability to nursing practice and developing strategies. If that's your week, this page is about your job.

The honest answer

Most tasks in this job are the kind AI has learned to do: analyzing computer and information technologies to determine applicability to nursing practice. The tasks, though, are not you.

Your move: three real directions from here ↓

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 58%
changing shape: 20%
staying human: 22%

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

Whole-job exposure score 58 out of 100 (53–64 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, across 39 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 computer systems analysts 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 2026-08-04. Read the full method.

It would be a lie to soften that; translating nursing practice information between nurses and systems engineers is what this work rebuilds around. Your move starts there.

Your week, as this page understands it

Analyze science, engineering, business, and other data processing problems to develop and implement solutions to complex applications problems, system administration issues, or network concerns. Perform systems management and integration functions, improve existing computer systems, and review computer system capabilities, workflow, and schedule limitations. May analyze or recommend commercially available software. The job title says “computer systems analysts”. The real job is the part underneath: translating nursing practice information between nurses and systems engineers. 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 computer systems analysts is not one task. It is 39 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is translating nursing practice information between nurses and systems engineers, and the ledger below shows exactly why.

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 58%
changing shape: 20%
staying human: 22%

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 2026-08-04. 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.

1 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

23 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.

Developing or implementing policies or practices to ensure the privacy
This is reading one thing and writing another: policies in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Develop or implement policies or practices to ensure the privacy, confidentiality, or security of patient information.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 72 out of 100 (68–76 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: Privacy and security policies are drafted from well published rules, which 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 4/4.
Analyzing and interpreting patient, nursing or information systems data to improve nursing services
This is reading one thing and writing another: patient, nursing or information systems data in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Analyze and interpret patient, nursing, or information systems data to improve nursing services.” (O*NET 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: Analysing patient and nursing data to find improvements is a data job 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 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Troubleshooting program and system malfunctions to restore normal functioning
This is reading one thing and writing another: program in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Troubleshoot program and system malfunctions to restore normal functioning.” (O*NET 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: Diagnosing faults from logs and error messages is something software now does quickly and often correctly.
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, implementing or evaluating health information technology applications, tools, processes or structures to assist nurses with data management
This is reading one thing and writing another: health information technology applications, tools, processes or structures in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Develop, implement, or evaluate health information technology applications, tools, processes, or structures to assist nurses with data management.” (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: Building and evaluating tools that help nurses manage data is software development work.
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.

Changing shape

7 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.

Using informatics science to design or implement health information technology applications for resolution of clinical or health care administrative problems
The software now makes the first pass at informatics science, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Use informatics science to design or implement health information technology applications for resolution of clinical or health care administrative problems.” (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: Designing clinical systems is technical work, though the decisive detail sits in each hospital practice.
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.
Designing, developing, selecting, testing, implementing and evaluating new or modified informatics solutions, data structures and decision-support mechanisms to support patients
The software now makes the first pass at new or modified informatics solutions, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Design, develop, select, test, implement, and evaluate new or modified informatics solutions, data structures, and decision-support mechanisms to support patients, health care professionals, and their information management and human-computer and human-technology interactions within health care contexts.” (O*NET 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: Designing and testing informatics solutions is technical work with documented methods.
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.
Reading current literature
The software now makes the first pass at current literature, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Read current literature, talk with colleagues, and participate in professional organizations or conferences to keep abreast of developments in informatics.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 41 out of 100 (34–48 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 summarise the literature, but conferences and colleagues carry knowledge that is not written down.
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 1/4 · how much data exists 4/4.

Staying human

9 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.

Translating nursing practice information between nurses and systems engineers
The value here is that a specific person handles practice information and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Translate nursing practice information between nurses and systems engineers, analysts, or designers, using object-oriented models or other techniques.” (O*NET 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: Bridging nursing and technical language is partly translation, but it works through conversations with both sides.
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.
Identifying, collecting, recording or analyzing data relevant to the nursing care of patients
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for this work, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Identify, collect, record, or analyze data relevant to the nursing care of patients.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 32 out of 100 (25–39 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Collecting patient care data is regulated clinical work, even though the analysis part is straightforward.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Applying knowledge of computer science
The value here is that a specific person handles knowledge of computer science and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Apply knowledge of computer science, information science, nursing, and informatics theory to nursing practice, education, administration, or research, in collaboration with other health informatics specialists.” (O*NET 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: The theory is published, but applying it here works through collaboration with other specialists.
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.

Show the other 29 tasks

Reading manuals, periodicals and technical reports to learn how to develop programs that meet staff and user requirements
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: manuals, periodicals and technical reports in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 3 · Core
Source: “Read manuals, periodicals, and technical reports to learn how to develop programs that meet staff and user requirements.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 100 out of 100 (96–100 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 manuals and technical reports and pulling out what matters is a real strength of software.
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 4/4.
Reviewing and analyzing computer printouts and performance indicators to locate code problems
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: computer printouts in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Review and analyze computer printouts and performance indicators to locate code problems, and correct errors by correcting codes.” (O*NET 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: Finding and fixing code errors from logs and performance figures is a task software does very 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.
Using object-oriented programming languages
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: object-oriented programming languages in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Use object-oriented programming languages, as well as client and server applications development processes and multimedia and Internet technology.” (O*NET 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 code in common languages is one of the things software has become genuinely good at.
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.
Analyzing computer and information technologies to determine applicability to nursing practice
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: computer in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Analyze computer and information technologies to determine applicability to nursing practice, education, administration, and research.” (O*NET 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: Assessing whether a technology fits nursing work is research and comparison against published information.
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.
Expanding or modifying system to serve new purposes or improve work flow
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: system in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 3 · Core
Source: “Expand or modify system to serve new purposes or improve work flow.” (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: Extending or reworking a system is well-documented technical work that coding tools now handle a lot of.
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.
Determining computer software or hardware needed to set up or alter systems
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: computer software in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 3 · Core
Source: “Determine computer software or hardware needed to set up or alter systems.” (O*NET 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: Working out what software or hardware is needed draws on widely published product information.
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.
Analyzing information processing or computation needs and planning and designing computer systems
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: information in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Analyze information processing or computation needs and plan and design computer systems, using techniques such as structured analysis, data modeling, and information engineering.” (O*NET 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: System analysis and design use documented methods and produce documents, which suits software 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.
Assessing the usefulness of pre-developed application packages and adapt them to a user environment
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: the usefulness of pre-developed application packages in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 3 · Core
Source: “Assess the usefulness of pre-developed application packages and adapt them to a user environment.” (O*NET 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 software packages and fitting them to local needs is research and configuration work.
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.
Defining the goals of the system and devise flow charts and diagrams describing logical operational steps of programs
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: the goals of the system in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 3 · Core
Source: “Define the goals of the system and devise flow charts and diagrams describing logical operational steps of programs.” (O*NET 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: Turning a described process into goals, flow charts and diagrams is something software does 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.
Developing, documenting and revising system design procedures, testing procedures and quality standards
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: system design procedures, testing procedures and quality standards in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 3 · Core
Source: “Develop, document, and revise system design procedures, test procedures, and quality standards.” (O*NET 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: Design procedures, test plans and quality standards are documents that 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.
Using the computer in the analysis and solution of business problems
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: the computer in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Use the computer in the analysis and solution of business problems, such as development of integrated production and inventory control and cost analysis systems.” (O*NET 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: Building analysis tools for stock, production and cost problems is programming work 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.
Preparing cost-benefit and return-on-investment analyses to aid in decisions on system implementation
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: cost-benefit in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 3 · Supplemental
Source: “Prepare cost-benefit and return-on-investment analyses to aid in decisions on system implementation.” (O*NET 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: Cost-benefit and return-on-investment sums are modelling work 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.
Specifying inputs accessed by the system and planning the distribution and use of the results
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: inputs in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 3 · Core
Source: “Specify inputs accessed by the system and plan the distribution and use of the results.” (O*NET 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: Specifying inputs and how results are used is written design work software drafts 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.
Recommending new equipment or software packages
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: new equipment in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 3 · Core
Source: “Recommend new equipment or software packages.” (O*NET 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: Recommending kit or software packages relies on published product information and comparisons.
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.
Disseminating information about nursing informatics science and practice to the profession
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: information in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Disseminate information about nursing informatics science and practice to the profession, other health care professions, nursing students, and the public.” (O*NET 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: Writing and presenting explanatory material for colleagues and the public is drafting 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 1/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Developing strategies, policies or procedures for introducing, evaluating or modifying information technology applied to nursing practice, administration, education or researching
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: strategies, policies or procedures in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Develop strategies, policies or procedures for introducing, evaluating, or modifying information technology applied to nursing practice, administration, education, or research.” (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: Strategies and procedures for new technology are documents, drafted well from published guidance.
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.
Providing staff and users with assistance solving computer-related problems
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 4 · Core
Source: “Provide staff and users with assistance solving computer-related problems, such as malfunctions and program problems.” (O*NET 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: Most support questions have documented answers, and software can give them straight away.
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.
Coordinating and linking the computer systems within an organization to increase compatibility so that information
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: the computer systems within an organization in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Coordinate and link the computer systems within an organization to increase compatibility so that information can be shared.” (O*NET 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: Connecting systems so they share data is technical work with well documented methods.
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.
Providing consultation to nurses regarding hardware or software configuration
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: consultation in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 3 · Core
Source: “Provide consultation to nurses regarding hardware or software configuration.” (O*NET 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: Configuration advice is documented and software can give it accurately and 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 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Testing, maintaining and monitoring computer programs and systems, including coordinating the installation of computer programs and systems
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at computer programs, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Test, maintain, and monitor computer programs and systems, including coordinating the installation of computer programs and systems.” (O*NET 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: Testing and monitoring systems is largely scripted work, though installations sometimes need someone 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.
Developing or delivering training programs for health information technology
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at programs, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Develop or deliver training programs for health information technology, creating operating manuals as needed.” (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; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Manuals and training courses are quick for software to produce; delivery still often involves a person.
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 4/4.
Training staff and users to work with computer systems and programs
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at staff, 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 3 · Core
Source: “Train staff and users to work with computer systems and programs.” (O*NET 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: 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: Training material and walkthroughs are easy to produce, though people often want a person teaching them.
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 2/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Designing, conducting or providing support to nursing informatics research
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at support, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Design, conduct, or provide support to nursing informatics research.” (O*NET 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: Research design and analysis can be drafted, but running a study needs accountable people.
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.
Informing local, state, national and international health policies related to information management and communication
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles local, state, national and international health policies and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Inform local, state, national, and international health policies related to information management and communication, confidentiality and security, patient safety, infrastructure development, and economics.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 26 out of 100 (19–33 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: Evidence briefings can be written, but influencing policy depends on people and relationships.
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 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Conferring with clients regarding the nature of the information processing or computation needs a computer program
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles clients regarding the nature of the information and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 3 · Core
Source: “Confer with clients regarding the nature of the information processing or computation needs a computer program is to address.” (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: Understanding what a client actually needs comes from conversation and reading between the lines.
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.
Consulting with management to ensure agreement on system principles
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles management and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Consult with management to ensure agreement on system principles.” (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: Getting managers to agree on how a system should work is a persuasion job done with people.
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.
Interviewing or surveying workers
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: workers, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · Supplemental
Source: “Interview or survey workers, observe job performance, or perform the job to determine what information is processed and how it is processed.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 18 out of 100 (11–25 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: Interviews and watching people work happen on site, and much of what matters is unwritten.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · 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.
Supervising computer programmers or other systems analysts or serving as project leaders for particular systems projects
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles computer programmers and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 3 · Supplemental
Source: “Supervise computer programmers or other systems analysts or serve as project leaders for particular systems projects.” (O*NET 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 team of developers depends on trust and judgement about people.
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.
Planning, installing, repairing or troubleshooting telehealth technology applications or systems in homes
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: telehealth technology applications, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · Supplemental
Source: “Plan, install, repair, or troubleshoot telehealth technology applications or systems in homes.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 12 out of 100 (8–16 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Fitting and fixing telehealth kit in someone home means travelling there and handling equipment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

What this job pays, and how many people do it

Median pay: $105,850a 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: 519,530in 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: patient, nursing or information systems data in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: analyzing computer and information technologies to determine applicability to nursing practice and developing or implementing policies or practices to ensure the privacy. What it cannot do is be trusted in person, which is what practice information 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

The exposed part of your job is the biggest part, and I am not going to dress that up: analyzing computer and information technologies to determine applicability to nursing practice is work today's tools do quickly and cheaply, and that is not coming back.

So, given all that: 58% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 20% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 22% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 39 scored tasks. It is not a forecast about you.

What you have that the software does not is translating nursing practice information between nurses and systems engineers, 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 patient, nursing or information systems data 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 patient, nursing or information systems data, 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 analyzing computer and information technologies to determine applicability to nursing practice” 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 translating nursing practice information between nurses and systems engineers 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, 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 computer systems analysts (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was network and computer systems administrators: only about 5% of its durable work is work you already do and it is under the same pressure this job is. Your own job splits about 58/42: 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 “translate nursing practice information between nurses and systems engineers, analysts, or designers…”, 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.

Network and Computer Systems Administrators
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already provide consultation to nurses regarding hardware or software configuration, and their equivalent is to maintain and administer computer networks and related computing environments. Across both published task lists that is about 5% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 5% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. I will not move you off one melting floe onto another: 65% of its own task list already scores in the top exposure band (60/100 in this release), so the same software is eating it.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Computer Occupations, All Other
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already train staff and users to work with computer systems and programs, and their equivalent is to train system users in system operation or maintenance. Across both published task lists that is about 4% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 4% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. I will not move you off one melting floe onto another: 70% of its own task list already scores in the top exposure band (66/100 in this release), so the same software is eating it.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Computer Programmers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already train staff and users to work with computer systems and programs, and their equivalent is to train users on the use and function of computer programs. Across both published task lists that is about 4% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 4% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. I will not move you off one melting floe onto another: 66% of its own task list already scores in the top exposure band (66/100 in this release), so the same software is eating it. And it is a narrow door: about 92,230 of those jobs against 519,530 of yours (OEWS May 2025), 18% as many seats.
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: 58% of its task weight, across 39 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: translating nursing practice information between nurses and systems engineers 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.

You are reading the United States figures

The United Kingdom splits this work across more than one official group, of which IT business analysts, architects and systems designers 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

The other groups this work is counted across:

Information technology professionals n.e.c.

In UK official statistics this job is counted as IT business analysts, architects and systems designers and Information technology professionals n.e.c.. Pay is shown separately for each of those groups (medians cannot be averaged together), while the task list and the scores on this page are for this group only.

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:
American Job Center locator
An American Job Center will sit down with you for free. Find yours by ZIP code.
Free
- CareerOneStop local help hub
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Licensed occupations finder
Check what your state actually requires before you pay for anything.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop
Free

No Space for this job, but one for what is happening to it

Nothing Collab365 runs is built for computer systems analysts, and we are not going to point you at the nearest one and call it a fit.

The working behind that

The low-code Spaces (Power Apps, Power Automate) are explicitly written for people who cannot code. Routing a systems analyst there is not a skill gain.

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 58% of the work on this page is already inside what they can do.

Try The AI Authority free →

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 computer systems analysts. 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 computer systems analysts 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 Space for computer systems analysts yet. Should there be one?

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

Collab365 launches new communities where the need is real. If one for computer systems analysts existed, with researched problems, courses and people in the same boat, would you want in?

Your email

We use your email address for one thing: to tell you if a Space for computer systems analysts launches. We never sell it, never use it for unrelated marketing, and every email has a one-click unsubscribe. Our privacy policy has the full version.

This unlocks nothing. Every figure, every row and every step on this page is already yours, whether you fill this in or not.

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 Computer Systems Analysts?: Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 39 official task statements scored for Computer Systems Analysts (United States, SOC 15-1211), 58% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 58 out of 100 (range 53–64, 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 “Computer Systems Analysts” can AI already do?: The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Read manuals, periodicals, and technical reports to learn how to develop programs that meet staff and user requirements” (100/100, very high); “Review and analyze computer printouts and performance indicators to locate code problems, and correct errors by correcting codes” (93/100, very high); “Use object-oriented programming languages, as well as client and server applications development processes and multimedia and Internet technology” (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 “Computer Systems Analysts” stay human?: About 22% 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: “Plan, install, repair, or troubleshoot telehealth technology applications or systems in homes” (12/100, minimal); “Supervise computer programmers or other systems analysts or serve as project leaders for particular systems projects” (18/100, minimal); “Interview or survey workers, observe job performance, or perform the job to determine what information is processed and how it is processed” (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 “Computer Systems Analysts” do about AI?: Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 58% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 22% 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 Computer Systems Analysts 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 39 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.
1 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: 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 2026-08-04.
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.

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.