Human Resource Management
Not included unless you switch them on: 328,800 postings from Fortune 500 career sites and 68,167 postings from small-employer job boards and 14,055 postings from US federal jobs, collected since 27 September 2026. The published figures stay on the panel they have always used.
How Human Resource Management relates to the other programs
2,603 of the 147,150 postings in the United States in the last 90 days count toward Human Resource Management (1.8%), the 7th largest of the 11 programs. 2,005 count toward it alone; 598 also count toward another program. 34.7% are AI-related, against 34.8% across all postings: the 7th highest of the 10 programs with enough postings to say.
Human Resource Management is the large circle. Each small circle overlaps it in proportion to how much of its work styles it shares with Human Resource Management: the most alike program has 80% of its area inside, a program with half that similarity half as much, and one that shares nothing just touches. Around the ring, programs sit next to the ones they share most with. The number in each circle is the exact figure; every circle opens that program.
Most alike on work styles
- Finance86% in common
Cooperation · Initiative · Analytical Thinking · Stress Tolerance · Dependability
- Sales83% in common
Cooperation · Initiative · Independence · Dependability · Innovation
- Business Management81% in common
Cooperation · Initiative · Analytical Thinking · Dependability · Stress Tolerance
- Accounting79% in common
Cooperation · Initiative · Analytical Thinking · Stress Tolerance · Attention to Detail
- Global Supply Chain Management77% in common
Cooperation · Initiative · Analytical Thinking · Dependability · Stress Tolerance
- Marketing76% in common
Cooperation · Initiative · Analytical Thinking · Innovation · Dependability
- Information Systems73% in common
Cooperation · Initiative · Analytical Thinking · Innovation · Independence
- Strategic Management73% in common
Cooperation · Initiative · Analytical Thinking · Innovation · Dependability
- Experience Design and Management67% in common
Cooperation · Initiative · Analytical Thinking · Innovation · Attention to Detail
- Entrepreneurial Management55% in common
Initiative · Cooperation · Analytical Thinking · Stress Tolerance · Innovation
“In common” is the share of the two programs’ work styles mixes that they hold together: for each item, the smaller of its two shares, summed, over the larger, summed. Items shown are the ones both programs ask for most, each held by at least 20 postings in both. Last 90 days, every geography. A posting counts toward a program when the discipline classifier assigns it there (how postings are classified).
Where Human Resource Management postings fall across the four quadrants
Each bar counts Human Resource Management postings in one quadrant, not the whole quadrant. The filled part is how many of those are AI-related. The last figure on each row turns it round: how much of that whole quadrant of the labour market Human Resource Management postings make up. Last 90 days, by real posting date. Each quadrant’s name opens it on the overview, across every program.
- Business, AI-thinthe established business majors, unchanged1,913postings30.5%AI-relatedHuman Resource Management is 2.1% of all Business, AI-thin postings
- Business-deep AIan AI-in-business major646postings43.5%AI-relatedHuman Resource Management is 1.6% of all Business-deep AI postings
- Hybrid AIan information systems major, revised for AI27postingstoo few postings for an AI shareHuman Resource Management is 0.3% of all Hybrid AI postings
What the four quadrants are cut on. The capabilities a posting asks for, read from its description. A role naming three or more distinct engineering capabilities has builder depth; three or more business capabilities gives business depth. Both is Hybrid, neither is AI-thin. There are four because two yes-or-no tests cross, which is what makes them quadrants rather than a list. The threshold of three is the one the source analysis used, adopted rather than reinvented so the two stay comparable.
The 2,586 postings drawn here are this program’s share of the panel: postings carrying a real posting date from the last 90 days in the United States that the discipline classifier assigns to it. A posting can count toward more than one program. Quadrants with fewer than 20 postings are left out, and AI shares are withheld below 200.
What each quadrant asks for
Ranked by how far Business, AI-thin sits from the other quadrants, not by how often the item appears. The bar is this region; the ticks are the others. An item everybody asks for tells you nothing about where you are.
Methods and practices
Ways of working, whether codified like Six Sigma or learned by repetition like presenting.
Partly definitional. Quadrants are cut on how many of these terms a posting names, so a quadrant leads on the terms that put it there. The ordering is still informative; the level is not a discovery.
- Process improvementabout 13 in 100 postings ask for this13%−13.1 points vs the other quadrant
- Project managementabout 8 in 100 postings ask for this8.3%−12.9 points vs the other quadrant
- Change managementabout 6 in 100 postings ask for this5.8%−11.5 points vs the other quadrant
- Stakeholder managementabout 5 in 100 postings ask for this4.8%−10.8 points vs the other quadrant
- Roadmapabout 3 in 100 postings ask for this3.0%−9.4 points vs the other quadrant
- Negotiationabout 9 in 100 postings ask for this9.4%−8.2 points vs the other quadrant
- Organizational changeabout 4 in 100 postings ask for this3.6%−6.6 points vs the other quadrant
- Business processabout 3 in 100 postings ask for this3.3%−6.1 points vs the other quadrant
Shares are of postings in this region over the last 90 days, by real posting date, in the geography chosen above. These figures were fixed to the United States until 22 September 2026 and could not follow that choice; they can now.
Where these numbers come from
5,685 Human Resource Management postings have been collected in all. The figures above use 2,603 of them: the last 90 days (5,416), and of those, the ones in the United States. Each bar is one source.
- Remote job boardsboards listing remote roles1,841usedof 4,003 collected31.8%AI-related
- The Musea general job board, not chosen for AI472usedof 927 collected28.2%AI-related
- Employer career siteschosen because these employers post AI work290usedof 706 collected63.4%AI-related
- Hacker Newsmonthly hiring threads, mostly without a usable date or place0usedof 49 collected
The sources ask for AI at very different rates because they were collected for different reasons, so the 34.7% AI share at the top of the page is a mix of them and moves with that mix. Compare sources side by side rather than reading the pooled figure as the market’s. How each source is collected, and why they are never pooled for the market figures, is under the four sub-corpora on the research page.
What this page cannot tell you yet
No job titles from this program
The rules matching postings to this discipline were written without input from the people who know where these graduates go. Titles you supply become candidate rules, measured against the corpus before anything is published.
No employers from this program
None of the employers who actually hire your graduates have been named, so the panel can only describe firms that happen to post on the boards already collected. Named employers are resolved to their public job feed and collected directly.
Two things from you change all of the above. The job titles your graduates commonly take, and the employers who commonly hire them. Titles become candidate classifier rules; employers become collection targets, deduplicated across every program so the ones several of you name independently get resolved first.
Sign in to add them. Everything you enter is stored as a claim from your program, never merged into the posting evidence, and shown with your program named beside it.