IBM announced it’s tripling entry-level hiring in 2026, targeting Gen Z workers. But they’ve rewritten every role for AI fluency, junior devs spend less time coding, and senior employees were let go. Is this a pipeline or a displacement?
IBM announced it’s tripling entry-level hiring in 2026, targeting Gen Z workers. But they’ve rewritten every role for AI fluency, junior devs spend less time coding, and senior employees were let go. Is this a pipeline or a displacement?
Source: What About AI? — James Perkins
On the surface, this looks like the best news we’ve had to share on this podcast in a while. IBM, a $240 billion tech giant, announced it’s tripling entry-level hiring in 2026, targeting Gen Z workers across departments including software development.
In a market where 37% of organizations plan to replace early career roles with AI, and young college grad unemployment sits at 5.6% (near its highest in over a decade outside the pandemic), that sounds like a lifeline.
But peel back one layer and the picture changes.
IBM’s CHRO Nickle LaMoreaux announced the move at Charter’s Leading With AI Summit, framing it as forward-looking investment. Her argument: “The companies three to five years from now that are going to be the most successful are those companies that doubled down on entry-level hiring in this environment.”
The key detail: IBM isn’t recreating old jobs. They’ve rewritten every entry-level position to account for AI fluency. Junior software developers, for example, no longer spend 34 hours a week coding. Instead, they’re working on marketing, going out with clients, and building new products. AI handles the routine coding. HR staff now focus on intervening when chatbots produce errors rather than answering every question directly.
LaMoreaux acknowledged it plainly: “The entry-level jobs that you had two to three years ago, AI can do most of them.”
So IBM is hiring junior people. But for fundamentally different roles than what “entry-level developer” meant even two years ago.
James Perkins isn’t buying the benevolent narrative: “On the surface, this sounds really good. In reality, just below the surface, this is not a good sign. They’re probably just cutting the highest salaries from the top of the house and bringing in the junior developers, expecting that those junior employees coupled with AI internally will be enough to make up the difference.”
His reasoning: IBM didn’t bring in Gen Z employees AND keep the senior folks to train them. They said goodbye to senior employees and welcomed Gen Z. That’s not a pipeline. That’s a displacement.
James sees this as a confirming condition for what they’ve discussed on previous episodes about how companies will slowly phase out workers with AI. Bring in cheaper labor, augment them with AI tools, and achieve roughly the same output at a fraction of the cost.
Sean offers a more balanced read. He sees it as potentially brilliant from a business perspective: a hedge against the risk of a broken talent pipeline. If AI doesn’t materialize as effectively as everyone expects, IBM will be the company that still has a bench of developers while competitors scrambled to poach talent at premium prices. If AI does transform everything, IBM has a workforce that grew up with the technology and can leverage it natively.
One of the most interesting tensions in the episode: is it easier to bring in Gen Z workers who grew up with AI, or train experienced developers to adopt it?
Sean’s take: “I think the old paradigm of junior developer eventually becomes senior developer is basically just a more experienced better version of the previous thing. But I think an AI engineer is just different. They’re empowered with different technology. Everything they do is probably different than any previous junior or senior track has ever looked like.”
James pushes back: “If you’re a senior developer, there’s things you know that go beyond the actual code. Things around maintenance, planning for backouts, writing appropriate test cases. AI can do these things, but there’s a lot of knowledge locked up in some of these senior employees. Companies would benefit equally if those folks were trained on how to use AI.”
The ideal scenario, both agree, is doing both: hire Gen Z and retain senior talent. Train everyone on AI. Build the actual pipeline. But that’s not what IBM appears to be doing.
The specifics of how IBM rewrote these positions reveal where the industry is headed. Junior developers spending less time coding and more time with customers. HR staff overseeing chatbots rather than doing the work directly. The common thread: the entry-level worker of the future is an AI supervisor, not a task executor.
That’s a fundamentally different skill set. It values communication, judgment, and the ability to catch errors over raw technical execution. And it raises a serious question about upward mobility. If entry-level roles are now “supervise the AI and talk to customers,” what does the senior version of that role look like? Does the traditional junior-to-senior developer pipeline even make sense anymore?
For Gen Z entering the workforce: IBM is hiring, and that’s genuinely good news in a tight market. But make yourself stand out by demonstrating AI fluency across multiple platforms. James’s advice: “If you go into an interview and you teach the interviewer something new about AI they didn’t know, that’s going to work in your favor.”
For experienced developers and senior workers: Don’t assume your experience protects you. James warns bluntly: “If you’re not augmented by AI, you’re not going to persist in any industry or any career right now.” If you tried AI tools two years ago and dismissed them, try again. As James puts it: “It went from grade school to high school to college to PhD level ability in the past two years. And now it’s changing bi-weekly.”
For everyone: The career path is being rewritten in real time. The question isn’t whether AI changes your role. It’s whether you’re the one driving that change or being caught by it.
Free Guide: IBM Hiring Analysis — What It Means for Knowledge Workers
Get the full breakdown — what IBM says vs. what’s actually happening, the two possible readings, the rewritten role comparison, and your action plan.
Download Free Guide| Claim | Source |
|---|---|
| IBM tripling entry-level hiring in US for 2026 | Bloomberg / Fortune / Axios, Feb 2026 |
| Nickle LaMoreaux quote on doubling down on entry-level hiring | Fortune / Allwork.Space, Feb 2026 |
| Entry-level devs now spend less time coding, more on clients | Axios / PYMNTS, Feb 2026 |
| 37% of organizations plan to replace early career roles with AI | Korn Ferry report via Fortune, Feb 2026 |
| Young college grad unemployment at 5.6%, near decade high | Fortune, Feb 2026 |
| AI literacy is fastest-growing skill in US | LinkedIn via Fortune, Feb 2026 |
| LaMoreaux: entry-level jobs from 2-3 years ago, AI can do most | Axios / Fortune, Feb 2026 |
| Junior devs previously spent 34 hrs/week coding | Axios, Feb 2026 |
| IBM: $240 billion tech company | Fortune / Bloomberg, Feb 2026 |
Our database covers every major profession with specific displacement scores, timeline estimates, and adaptation strategies.
Coaching: For personalized career guidance, visit whataboutai.com/coaching.
Take our free quiz to get a personalized assessment of how AI might impact your specific job and industry.
Take the Free QuizSpotify’s co-CEO told analysts their top engineers have written zero code by hand since December. Internal platform HONK, built on Claude Code, lets engineers ship from their phones. 30% productivity gains, 50+ features, record margins. Here’s what it means for every knowledge worker.
Suleyman says 12–18 months. Amodei says 1–3 years. Altman, Musk, and Hassabis converge on the same window. These aren’t fringe voices — they’re the people building the technology. Here’s what it means for every knowledge worker.
The WEF just released a framework mapping four possible futures for the global job market by 2030. Two are manageable. Two are not. Based on everything we’re seeing on the ground, we’re headed toward the one most people aren’t prepared for.