How Students Can AI-Proof Their Careers
Artificial intelligence is going to eliminate a lot of jobs in the future. It’s possible to reduce the risk that it will be yours.
Artificial intelligence is going to eliminate a lot of jobs in the future. It’s possible to reduce the risk that it will be yours.
The current generation of college students is facing a challenge that those who came before never had to worry about: They’ll be competing with AI for jobs.
What can they do to get ready?
After all, artificial intelligence is likely to eliminate at least some jobs that formerly served as first rungs on career ladders. “We have to accept and embrace the idea that in fact with AI we are going to have jobs that are going to be eliminated and jobs that are going to be created, and we don’t know which ones,” says Joseph E. Aoun , president of Northeastern University.
That uncertainty leaves today’s college students struggling to prepare for a workplace that is changing faster than ever. We asked a range of career counselors and employers how they would suggest students AI-proof their careers. One consensus: It’s important to master skills not easily matched by machines, such as human-style communications and the ability to understand and work smoothly with people who have different perspectives and personalities.
“In many ways the human skills are going to be more fundamental than they are now,” as machines take over some routine tasks, Aoun says.
A survey of 255 employers by the National Association of Colleges and Employers last year found that the three top “competencies” they sought in job candidates were communication, teamwork and critical thinking.
Communication and teamwork rely on emotional intelligence, or EQ. “AI has probably won the IQ battle,” says Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic , chief innovation officer at Manpower Group and professor of business psychology at Columbia University, “but the EQ battle is up for grabs.”

Of course, that doesn’t mean students shouldn’t master AI. Skill in using AI as a productivity-enhancing tool can give them an edge over older workers who haven’t mastered ChatGPT and other AI programs.
But knowing how to use AI effectively isn’t enough. Here are some suggestions from the experts on how students—or really anybody—can reduce the risk they will eventually be replaced by AI.
AI can write computer code, improve grammar and solve math problems, but so far it lacks the ability to mediate squabbles among colleagues, charm potential clients over cocktails or soothe angry customers. So developing those skills may be one of a job applicant’s best selling points.
Anything that requires talking and cooperating with strangers is helpful. That includes volunteering in a nursing home or an after-school youth program, or leading an on-campus club or sport. Jobs that require dealing directly with lots of other people, including jerks, are an educational opportunity. “If you’re a waiter you will understand human beings better,” says Chamorro-Premuzic.
Focusing too heavily on one type of expertise could be a mistake if, as expected, AI eliminates lots of jobs in some specialties. It isn’t a risk only for technology fields like computer science; other fields such as accounting and finance are also being transformed by AI.
Instead, experts recommend having a portfolio of skills.
“If you have one skill, you compete with the masses that have that same one skill,” says Anna Esaki-Smith , author of “Make College Your Superpower.” In contrast, she says, “Should you stack on another skill, you become qualified for a wider range of opportunities.”
That could mean adding a minor or two to a major or going for a double major. It also could involve a strategic selection of electives. D. Raja , chief executive of CEI, a Pittsburgh information-technology consulting firm, says he increasingly looks for job candidates who have both technical skills and a grounding in business, enabling them to understand clients’ needs. An M.B.A. stacked atop a computer-science degree is one good strategy, he says.
Though a range of skills and knowledge is an advantage, it’s still important to develop deep expertise in at least one or two areas. “AI has disrupted superficial expertise,” Chamorro-Premuzic says. In other words, you have to know more than generative AI programs can spit out in a minute or two.
If AI will do at least some of the grunt work, people will still be needed to devise strategies and carry out complicated projects. Machines do pieces of work, but “we still need big-picture humans to put it all together,” says John Behrens , director of the technology and digital studies program at the University of Notre Dame.
To help students learn how to manage complexity, many universities require them to complete a capstone project before graduation. Those can include primary research, ambitious artworks or community-service projects.
Vanderbilt University calls such projects “immersion.” For his Vanderbilt project, Logan Glazier is converting an old school bus, once consigned to the junkyard, into an RV with solar panels mounted on the roof to power his refrigerator and other appliances.
He expects to finish the project within a few months, before graduating next spring with a degree in civil engineering. Glazier had to sell his idea to university administrators, persuade them to give him space to work on the bus, develop a plan and find materials. He watched dozens of YouTube videos and consulted with Vanderbilt professors.
He recalls the reaction he got from people at the engineering consulting firm HNTB when they heard about the project: “Wow, that’s really cool!” He got an HNTB internship in 2023 and recently accepted a full-time job at the firm starting in May, after his graduation.
As AI and other technological changes make career paths less predictable, adaptability will be an advantage. “We don’t know what the world is going to be like in five years or 10 years,” says Behrens.
Students can develop their adaptability by seeking out new experiences, such as studying abroad or taking unconventional courses. At Carnegie Mellon University, renowned for computer science and robotics, one of the most popular electives is “Acting for Non-Majors,” offered by the Pittsburgh school’s drama department. Students have long taken the course, but now demand has soared as students see it as a plus in the job market, forcing them to shed their inhibitions and engage with other people in unscripted ways.
This year, to accommodate demand, CMU quadrupled the capacity of the course.
“It’s exhilarating,” says Emily Ma , a math major. “Acting forces you to step outside your comfort zone.” That’s particularly important for a generation of young people who were isolated during the Covid-19 pandemic and spent far more time staring at screens than they did engaging directly with people.
Amid all the changes AI is bringing, companies want fresh thinking. So one route to success is to be a “moderate misfit,” unhappy with the status quo and ready to innovate, says Chamorro-Premuzic. By moderate, he means that “you fit in well enough and work well with others but are not so bland and risk-averse as to lose the desire for change and progress.”
Chamorro-Premuzic advises young people not to seek employers that fit perfectly with their values but rather to “look for places they like but which they also dream of transforming and improving.”
AI is like a B+ student and can tell you what the average person would say, says Matthew Rascoff , vice provost for digital education at Stanford University. A+ work, he says, is the product of an individual brain with a distinctive voice. So he urges students to develop their own voices and identities. “The more you outsource” to AI, he says, “the less you are developing that muscle.”
As housing drives wealth and policy debate, the real risk is an economy hooked on growth without productivity to sustain it.
Limited to 630 units, Lamborghini’s latest Urus Capsule pushes personalisation further than ever, blending hybrid performance with over 70 bespoke design combinations.
As housing drives wealth and policy debate, the real risk is an economy hooked on growth without productivity to sustain it.
For decades, Australia has leaned into its reputation as the lucky country. But luck, as it turns out, is not an economic strategy.
What once looked like resilience now appears increasingly fragile. Beneath the surface of rising property values and steady headline growth, the Australian economy is showing signs of strain that can no longer be ignored.
Recent data paints a sobering picture. Australia has recorded one of the largest declines in real household disposable income per capita among advanced economies.
Wages have failed to keep pace with inflation, meaning many Australians are working harder for less. On a per capita basis, income growth has stalled and, at times, reversed.
And yet, on paper, things still look relatively solid. GDP is growing. Unemployment remains low. But that growth is increasingly being driven by population expansion rather than productivity.
More people are contributing to output, but not necessarily improving living standards.
That distinction matters.
For years, Australia’s economic success rested on a powerful combination: a once-in-a-generation mining boom, a credit-fuelled housing market, strong migration and a property sector that rarely faltered. Between 1991 and 2020, the country avoided recession entirely, building enormous wealth in the process.
But much of that wealth is tied to property. Around two-thirds of household wealth sits in real estate, inflated by leverage and sustained by demand. It has worked, until now.
The problem is the supply side of the economy has not kept up.
Housing supply is falling behind population growth. Rental vacancies are near record lows.
Construction firms are collapsing at an elevated rate. At the same time, massive infrastructure pipelines are competing with residential projects for labour and materials, pushing costs higher and delaying delivery.
The result is a system under pressure from all angles.
Despite near full employment, productivity growth has stagnated for years. In simple terms, Australians are putting in more hours without generating more output per hour. The economy is running faster, butgoing nowhere.
Meanwhile, government spending continues to expand. Public debt is approaching $1 trillion, with spending now accounting for a record share of GDP.
The gap between spending and revenue has been filled by borrowing for decades, adding further pressure to an already stretched system.
This is where the uncomfortable question emerges.
Has Australia become too reliant on a model driven by rising property values, expanding credit and population growth?
As asset prices rise, households feel wealthier and borrow more. Banks lend more. Governments collect more revenue. Migration fuels demand. The cycle reinforces itself.
But when productivity stalls and debt outpaces real income, the system begins to depend on constant expansion just to stay stable.
It is not a collapse scenario. But it is not particularly stable either.
Nowhere is this more evident than in housing.
The National Housing Accord targets 1.2 million new homes over five years, yet current completion rates are well below that pace. With approvals falling and construction costs rising, the gap between supply and demand is widening, not narrowing.
Housing is also one of the largest contributors to inflation, with costs rising sharply across rents, construction and utilities. Yet the private sector, from small investors to major developers, is struggling to make projects stack up in the current environment.
This brings the policy debate into sharper focus.
Tax settings such as negative gearing and capital gains concessions have undoubtedly boosted demand over the past two decades. But they have also supported supply. Removing them may ease prices briefly, but risks deepening the supply shortage over time.
That is the paradox.
Policies designed to make housing more affordable can, in practice, make the shortage worse if they discourage development. The optics may appeal, but the economics are far less forgiving.
It is also worth remembering that most property investors are not institutional players. The majority own just one investment property. They are, in many cases, ordinary Australians using real estate as their primary wealth-building tool.
Undermining that system without replacing it with a viable alternative risks unintended consequences, from reduced supply to higher rents and increased inflation.
So where does that leave Australia?
At a crossroads.
The country can continue to rely on population growth and rising asset prices to drive economic activity. Or it can shift towards a model built on productivity, innovation and sustainable growth.
The latter is harder. It requires structural reform, long-term thinking and political discipline.
But it is also the only path that leads to genuine, lasting prosperity.
The question is no longer whether Australia has been lucky.
It is whether it can evolve before that luck runs out.
Paul Miron is the Co-Founder & Fund Manager of Msquared Capital.
A divide has opened in the tech job market between those with artificial-intelligence skills and everyone else.
From Tokyo backstreets to quiet coastal towns and off-grid cabins, top executives reveal where they holiday and why stepping away makes the grind worthwhile.