"Companies keep asking, ' What worker type do I need?’ It is the wrong question. The right one is, what is the job to be done, and now, what can AI do to it."
Let's think about what actually happens when a company wants to get something done. Somebody decides, I need to improve marketing, so I need to hire a marketing manager. Or, I need to improve engineering, so I need a specialist. And they go looking for the person.
But that is not what they are really trying to achieve. What they are trying to achieve is a specific result. Maybe it is running a particular ABM campaign. Maybe it is implementing an AI-powered CRM that automates something they cannot do today. So before you decide who to hire, decide what the job to be done actually is. A job to be done is just an activity that produces a specific result.
Then, and only then, the resources
Once you are clear on the job, you can think about how to get it done. Sometimes you can do it with people you already have in-house. Sometimes it is about engaging somebody on a temporary basis, for a finite piece of work. And sometimes the job is so recurring, so deeply rooted in the company, that you genuinely need somebody full-time, every day. Those are three very different answers, and you only get to the right one if you start from the job, not from the job title.
The mistake is to run it backward: pick the worker type first, then go to the one provider you always use, and force the job to fit. That is how you end up paying for something you did not need, or missing the person you did.
AI just changed a lot of the answers
Here is what is new. For any leader today, you have to consider what AI does to the job to be done. There are jobs where AI gets you 100 percent of the way there. If it can, that works, and you are done. There are jobs where AI gets you 80 percent, and you need a person for a fractional piece. And there are jobs where AI gets you 50, 20, or 0 percent, and you need people.
So AI is one more tool in the toolkit. It is not a separate strategy. It is something you weigh at the very beginning, when you define the job: should this be done by people, or by people plus AI? Take a hiring manager in marketing running ABM campaigns. A couple of years ago, they hired a content specialist to write everything by hand. Today, the better hire might be a content specialist who deeply uses AI tools to research the competitors, the industry, and the newest tools, and produces far more.
The people who train themselves
And notice who that person is. They are somebody who trained themselves on AI. Because AI is moving so fast that there is no one who is going to teach you, and no training that keeps pace with how fast the learning has to happen. So the profile companies actually want now is the deeply curious person who trains themselves and gets much more done.
This has happened before. Years ago, someone in accounting closed the books by hand, and then Excel arrived, and somebody refused to use it. Right now that sounds absurd. It is the same today. The people who get to the edge of AI first, who adopt faster, have a tremendous impact on their organization.
So here is the question. When your team needs something done, are you still starting with the worker type: I need a temp, I need a freelancer? Or are you starting with the job to be done, and asking honestly whether people, AI, or people plus AI is the way to get it done?
If this is the kind of thinking you want more of, subscribe. I write about contingent workforce strategy and how the work actually gets done.
Author
Ernesto Lamaina
GM, Lifted
Ernesto Lamaina is the General Manager of Lifted, an Upwork company dedicated to helping enterprises source, engage, and manage contingent talent across every contract type—independent contractors, staff augmentation, employer of record, and managed services.
