While nearly a quarter of employers say they consider AI fluency an unrewarded baseline skill, the majority of workers disagree. More than half of the employees surveyed by compensation software company Payscale said they should earn more for developing AI skills, according to a recent report.
At the same time, 61% of employers said they’re rewriting job descriptions because of AI, but less than half say their salary structures have kept up with the tech changes.
More than 4 in 10 companies say they can’t find talent with the AI skills they need, which means they are likely to pay more for workers who do, Payscale said. That creates a potential “retention time bomb” as “current employees who upskill on AI will watch with resentment as new hires command 20% to 40% premiums they aren’t getting.”While 58% of companies said they are already paying premiums for AI skills or planning to do so, 19% are keeping their existing compensation structures and 13% are still evaluating their strategy, Payscale found. Only 8% said AI skills “are irrelevant to compensation.”
“The vast majority recognize that emergent skills demand rewards,” Payscale found.
The tension over compensation has shown up in several recent reports. More than 4 in 10 workers said they think they’re more likely to get a raise by leaving and then rejoining their company than by staying, according to a report from professional services company Marsh. Only 18% said the same in 2024.
That same Marsh report found that just 31% of employees said they thought they would be compensated for upskilling.
Likewise, a Sept. 16 report from consulting firm Robert Half found that 55% of the more than 440 Generation Z workers surveyed said they intended to look for a new job before the end of the year. Among those, 56% said they want better perks and benefits, and half said their career advancement is currently limited. READ MORE
by Ginger Christ
Source: ciodive.com
Industrial businesses should move beyond basic data collection and adopt financial-style decarbonisation analysis for evaluating environmental metrics. DuPont’s Carbon Fluency Framework evaluates greenhouse gas metrics using different factors such as product mass, revenue and unit margin. This methodology lets sustainability teams assess product footprints from multiple perspectives, rather than viewing emissions as standalone figures.
A recent exchange on LinkedIn involved a senior leader at McKinsey questioning whether the glass cliff even exists for female leaders at struggling companies. Julia Carreon didn’t anticipate that a LinkedIn post promoting her new book would spark an exchange that made a persuasive case for why she wrote the book in the first place.
I’ve written before about how good leaders give effective feedback when the stakes are high. That article articulates a method for structuring feedback to ensure you effectively deliver the content of your message so that it can be heard and so that it can actually help change behavior going forward.
