Futureproof
Menu

US dataswitch to UK

Management Analysts

gathering and organizing information on problems or procedures, documenting findings of study and preparing recommendations for implementation of new systems and planning study of work problems and procedures. 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: gathering and organizing information on problems or procedures. That is a slice of tasks, not of you.

Your move: what you can actually do about this ↓

That slice is not coming back; the core of the job, conferring with personnel concerned to ensure successful functioning of newly implemented systems or procedures, stays yours. The tools change hands, the accountability doesn't.

Your week, as this page understands it

Conduct organizational studies and evaluations, design systems and procedures, conduct work simplification and measurement studies, and prepare operations and procedures manuals to assist management in operating more efficiently and effectively. Includes program analysts and management consultants. The job title says “management analysts”. The real job is the part underneath: conferring with personnel concerned to ensure successful functioning of newly implemented systems or procedures. 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 management analysts is not one task. It is 11 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is conferring with personnel concerned to ensure successful functioning of newly implemented systems or procedures, and the ledger below shows exactly why.

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI
32%
changing shape
33%
staying human
35%

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

Whole-job exposure score 47 out of 100 (42–53 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, across 11 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 management 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.

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.

Shifting to AI

3 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.

  • Gathering and organizing information on problems or procedures

    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: “Gather and organize information on problems or procedures.” (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: Collecting and organising written information is a core AI strength when the material sits in company systems.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Analyzing data gathered and developing solutions or alternative methods of proceeding

    This is reading one thing and writing another: data in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Analyze data gathered and develop solutions or alternative methods of proceeding.” (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: Analysing data and laying out options is well-documented analytical work AI produces to a reviewable 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.

  • Documenting findings of study and preparing recommendations for implementation of new systems

    This is reading one thing and writing another: findings of study in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Document findings of study and prepare recommendations for implementation of new systems, procedures, or organizational changes.” (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: Writing up findings and recommendations follows familiar report structures, so AI drafts them for the analyst to sharpen.

    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 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.

  • Planning study of work problems and procedures

    The software now makes the first pass at study of work problems, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Plan study of work problems and procedures, such as organizational change, communications, information flow, integrated production methods, inventory control, or cost analysis.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 49 out of 100 (42–56 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.

    The rating behind it: Study plans draft well from documented method, but scoping the real problem depends on knowing the organisation.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Reviewing forms and reports and conferring with management and users about format

    The software now makes the first pass at forms, 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 · Core
    Source: “Review forms and reports and confer with management and users about format, distribution, and purpose, identifying problems and improvements.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 40 out of 100 (33–47 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: AI can review documents and spot problems, but agreeing changes happens in conversation with the people using them.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Developing and implementing records management program

    The software now makes the first pass at records management program, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Develop and implement records management program for filing, protection, and retrieval of records, and assure compliance with program.” (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: Records policies are well documented and easy to draft; rolling them out and checking compliance still involves 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.

  • Designing, evaluating, recommending and approving changes of forms and reports

    The software now makes the first pass at changes of forms, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.

    importance 3 · Core
    Source: “Design, evaluate, recommend, and approve changes of forms and reports.” (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: Redesigning forms and reports is document work AI does well, but approving the change is someones responsibility.

    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.

Staying human

4 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.

  • Conferring with personnel concerned to ensure successful functioning of newly implemented systems or procedures

    The value here is that a specific person handles personnel and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Confer with personnel concerned to ensure successful functioning of newly implemented systems or procedures.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 17 out of 100 (10–24 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: Checking a new system is working means talking with the staff using it and picking up their concerns.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · 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 2/4.

  • Interviewing personnel and conducting on-site observation to ascertain unit functions

    This work happens in the physical world: personnel, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Interview personnel and conduct on-site observation to ascertain unit functions, work performed, and methods, equipment, and personnel used.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (2–10 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Watching how work actually happens and drawing people out in interviews requires being on site with them.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

  • Preparing manuals and training workers in use of new forms

    The value here is that a specific person handles manuals and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.

    importance 4 · Core
    Source: “Prepare manuals and train workers in use of new forms, reports, procedures or equipment, according to organizational policy.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 39 out of 100 (32–46 allowing for uncertainty): low 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: Manuals and guides are strong AI output, though training staff to use them is usually done face to face.

    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 3/4.

Show the other 1 task

  • Recommending purchase of storage equipment and designing area layout to locate equipment in space available

    staying human

    The ratings behind this row put purchase of storage equipment well outside what today's tools can do on their own.

    importance 3 · Supplemental
    Source: “Recommend purchase of storage equipment and design area layout to locate equipment in space available.” (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: mistakes that are cheap to catch.

    The rating behind it: Layout options can be worked out on paper, but measuring the actual space and equipment means being there.

    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 2/4.

What this job pays, and how many people do it

Median pay
$101,860a 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
898,280in 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: study of work problems in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: gathering and organizing information on problems or procedures and analyzing data gathered and developing solutions or alternative methods of proceeding. What it cannot do is be trusted in person, which is what personnel 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. Gathering and organizing information on problems or procedures is going; conferring with personnel concerned to ensure successful functioning of newly implemented systems or procedures is not.

So, given all that: 32% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 33% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 35% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 11 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 personnel concerned to ensure successful functioning of newly implemented systems or procedures) 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 personnel concerned to ensure successful functioning of newly implemented systems or procedures, 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 management analysts (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was operations research analysts: only about 4% of its durable work is work you already do, it pays 12.7% less and there are far fewer of those jobs than of yours. 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 personnel concerned to ensure successful functioning of newly implemented systems…”, 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.

  • Operations Research Analysts

    Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already gather and organize information on problems or procedures, and their equivalent is to observe the current system in operation, and gather and analyze information about each…. 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. It is a pay cut, in those words: $88,940 against your $101,860, 12.7% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice. And it is a narrow door: about 108,510 of those jobs against 898,280 of yours (OEWS May 2025), 12% as many seats.

    Look at that job’s page anyway →

  • Industrial-Organizational Psychologists

    Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already plan study of work problems and procedures, and their equivalent is to facilitate organizational development and change. 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. And it is a narrow door: about 790 of those jobs against 898,280 of yours (OEWS May 2025), 0% as many seats.

    Look at that job’s page anyway →

  • Construction Managers

    Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already develop and implement records management program for filing, protection, and retrieval of records…, and their equivalent is to develop or implement environmental protection programs. 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.

    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: 32% of its task weight, across 11 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 Management consultants and business analysts 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:

In UK official statistics this job is counted as Management consultants and business analysts, Business and financial project management professionals, Quality assurance and regulatory professionals and Directors in consultancy services. 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

Two honest options, and no deadline on either

Free, and complete

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

A guided route for this

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

Microsoft 365 Report Builders is built for business analysts, reporting leads and Excel power users who are responsible for business reports without a dedicated data team (the people this page is about). It works on the part of your job that is growing rather than shrinking: the analysis and the report that carries it: clean data, defined measures, and a dashboard that still matches the business next month.

Try Microsoft 365 Report Builders free →

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

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

Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for management 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 management analysts yet. Should there be one?

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

We use your email address for one thing: to tell you if a Space for management 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 Management Analysts?
Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 11 official task statements scored for Management Analysts (United States, SOC 13-1111), 32% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 47 out of 100 (range 42–53, 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 “Management Analysts” can AI already do?
The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Gather and organize information on problems or procedures” (75/100, high); “Analyze data gathered and develop solutions or alternative methods of proceeding” (75/100, high); “Document findings of study and prepare recommendations for implementation of new systems, procedures, or organizational changes” (75/100, 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 “Management Analysts” stay human?
About 35% 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: “Interview personnel and conduct on-site observation to ascertain unit functions, work performed, and methods, equipment, and personnel used” (6/100, minimal); “Confer with personnel concerned to ensure successful functioning of newly implemented systems or procedures” (17/100, minimal); “Recommend purchase of storage equipment and design area layout to locate equipment in space available” (32/100, low). 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 “Management Analysts” do about AI?
Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 32% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 35% 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 Management 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 11 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 2026-08-04.
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 jobDownload this releaseLook 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 . 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.