The job title may stay the same while the job changes underneath it.
A planner who once spent most of the day gathering information may now spend more time questioning a system's recommendation. A supervisor may have fewer routine approvals and more exceptions to resolve. If the hiring process still measures the old work, the organization can select a capable person for the wrong job.
That is a practical problem, not a distant prediction. In a September 17 article, the World Economic Forum and Accenture described how supply chain work is shifting as technology takes on routine tasks and people take on more oversight, judgment, and exception handling. Their forecasts describe possible industry-wide change, not the requirements of any one employer's position. Read the World Economic Forum analysis.
The immediate question for a hiring manager is simpler: What does this person need to do well now, and what will the role require as the workflow changes?
Start with the decisions, not the old description
A job description often collects responsibilities over time. Some are still essential. Others describe tasks that have moved to software, another team, or a different stage of the process. It can also omit the judgment that experienced employees use every day.
Put the current work in front of the people closest to it. Ask:
- What outcomes is the role responsible for?
- Which decisions can the person make independently?
- Which system outputs must be checked, questioned, or escalated?
- What happens when the information is incomplete or wrong?
- Which qualifications must be present on day one, and which skills can be developed?
The U.S. Office of Personnel Management describes job analysis as connecting the tasks performed with the competencies needed to perform them. That connection matters when employers choose assessment and selection methods. See OPM's job analysis guidance.
Define what a person still owns
Automation can remove a task without removing accountability. Someone still has to notice a bad assumption, understand its consequences, and decide when to intervene.
Consider a hypothetical maintenance coordinator. Software now proposes a schedule based on equipment records and available labor. The coordinator no longer spends as much time building the first draft of the schedule. The harder work is recognizing when a proposed sequence conflicts with a safety requirement, production commitment, or specialist's availability. The coordinator must know when to stop, seek qualified input, and change the plan.
That is an illustration, not a claim about a customer's operation. Actual responsibilities, safety controls, and qualifications must come from the employer and its qualified specialists.
If you hire only for the old scheduling routine, you can miss the judgment the job now needs. If you look only for someone comfortable using AI, you can miss the same thing. Tool familiarity is useful when the job calls for it. It does not establish that a person can make the decisions the role owns.
Build the assessment around the current role
ODNA® Talent begins with the ODNA® Role Blueprint. It organizes the role's outcomes, responsibilities, work conditions, decisions, and risks so an employer can review what successful performance requires. That gives the team a clearer basis for deciding what to measure. See how the ODNA Talent process works.
In Assessment Architect Mode, ask ODNA can recommend a focused set of job-relevant measures from more than 200 validated scales and explain why they fit the role. An authorized person reviews, edits, and approves the assessment before it is delivered. Afterward, Report Analysis Mode can help prepare interview questions and development guidance for human review. Explore ask ODNA.
The sequence is deliberate: ODNA® Role Blueprint → Assessment Architect Mode → Human Review and Approval → Assessment Delivery → Report Analysis Mode → Human Decision.
An assessment supports the decision. It cannot certify technical competence, grant authority to perform regulated work, or guarantee performance. Keep required credentials, relevant work evidence, structured interviews, and qualified human judgment in the process. Review ODNA Talent's approach to job-relevant assessments.
Recheck the role as the work changes
A role definition is not finished because someone approved it once. Ask the manager and experienced employees to revisit it when a new system changes the workflow. Look at the exceptions, handoffs, and decisions that now take more time. Check whether the hiring criteria and interview questions still match those demands.
Then look at what happens after the hire. Which responsibilities required more training than expected? Which decisions still depend on one experienced employee? Where did the job description fail to explain the work? Use that evidence to improve the next Role Blueprint. Do not treat one hire's outcome as proof that an assessment caused it.
Before approving the next requisition, choose one role affected by AI or automation. Put the current description beside the work people actually perform. Mark what has changed, what remains essential, and what now requires more human judgment. That review is the starting point for a better hiring decision.
Sources and ODNA Talent resources
- World Economic Forum and Accenture, "3 ways to redesign work to solve the supply-chain talent crisis," September 17, 2026
- U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Job Analysis
- How It Works
- ask ODNA
- Job-Relevant Assessments
Educational information only. Organizations remain responsible for obtaining appropriate legal, scientific, privacy, accessibility, and professional guidance.