Technology hiring growth can leave capable candidates behind

Technology hiring growth can leave candidates behind

Technology vacancies can grow while capable people struggle to find a role they can enter or grow into. Candidates remain uneasy about the labor market even as demand rises, and opportunities for progression remain scarce. For chief information officers (CIOs) and engineering leaders, this tension raises a practical question: how well do hiring requirements help the organization recognize relevant capability?

The answer takes more than counting openings, because demand and access measure different things. More vacancies show that employers want to hire, but candidates also need a way to demonstrate relevant experience or develop the skills a role requires. Technology leaders shape that access through how they assess qualifications, where they seek candidates, and how they prepare existing employees for new responsibilities.

Examine what hiring requirements actually measure

The growth in postings makes these decisions more pressing. Dice, a technology recruitment business with a commercial interest in employers seeking technology candidates, found that U.S. technology job postings increased 18% year over year. Postings for AI and machine learning roles rose 91% over the same period, making them a particularly fast-growing area of demand. Yet the increase has done little to reassure candidates.

Alongside rising demand, respondents to Dice’s survey described qualification requirements becoming harder to meet. More than one-quarter said job descriptions contained unrealistic qualifications, while 21% said employers expected a broader range of technical skills than previously. These percentages measure perceptions of requirements, which differ from posting growth or rejection rates. They leave employers with two questions: is each requirement necessary, and does the work now demand a wider range of skills?

Answering those questions starts with the language in job descriptions. Emerging terms such as agentic AI, meaning AI systems that can take actions toward a goal, can replace older vocabulary even when some underlying experience remains relevant. Consider a candidate whose relevant experience appears under older terminology: a keyword-based screening check may flag the missing term and remove the résumé before a human reviewer sees it. A conversation or practical assessment could instead reveal transferable expertise or a genuine capability gap.

The risk comes when an employer treats that wording mismatch as a complete qualification decision. As requirements expand, rigid screening criteria can exclude experience that deserves a closer look. Reviewing the criteria alongside the job description helps the hiring team distinguish changes in terminology from changes in the work itself.

Assess essential capability through evidence

The review should connect each requirement to work the person will perform. CIOs should regularly examine job descriptions and screening criteria together, because updating one can leave the other using an outdated definition of qualification. Changing AI vocabulary makes this especially important: each criterion should identify expertise the role actually needs. The team can then decide which capabilities a candidate must bring and which it can help them develop.

This distinction gives hiring teams a clearer basis for assessing a résumé that meets only some requirements. Essential expertise needs direct evidence, while a skill someone can learn calls for an assessment of their foundation and the support they would need. Broader technical requirements may reflect genuinely more demanding work as AI changes which skills matter. Where a candidate lacks indispensable expertise, the requirement should stand.

Automated tools can support the assessment if human judgment remains central to the capability decision. A missing keyword can prompt a closer look, while evidence of a missing essential skill can justify rejection. Keeping these judgments separate gives screening results a clear purpose and prevents résumé wording from becoming the final measure of qualification.

When screening leaves a meaningful question unresolved, Dice’s Zeile recommends examining capability directly: “A conversation or practical assessment can help determine whether a candidate has the capabilities to succeed, even if their resume doesn’t match every keyword,” Zeile said. The advice comes from a provider that benefits commercially from technology recruitment. The hiring team’s task is to choose an assessment that resolves the uncertainty relevant to the role.

A conversation can clarify how earlier experience connects to proposed responsibilities, while a practical assessment can show whether the candidate can do relevant work. Zeile links this distinction to leadership responsibility: “CIOs who separate essential expertise from skills that can be learned are better positioned to find qualified candidates their hiring process might otherwise overlook.” Acting on that recommendation requires agreement about what the organization can realistically teach. Development is a credible option when the team has the time and support to help someone learn the skill.

Search beyond familiar markets and industries

Even a strong assessment process can evaluate only the candidates who reach it. Employers should therefore examine the geographic and industry boundaries of their searches alongside their qualification criteria. A search concentrated in familiar technology markets can leave relevant people outside consideration. Widening those boundaries lets the team assess experience its usual recruiting approach would miss.

Dice’s findings give employers a reason to review industry boundaries: insurance, manufacturing, and consulting were among the industries with the strongest hiring growth. Technical work in these settings offers a reason to look beyond traditional technology companies for relevant experience. The assessment should focus on candidates’ responsibilities and capabilities, because an industry label alone gives an incomplete account of what someone can do.

Geographic expansion follows the same reasoning: a search boundary should serve the hiring need. Broader coverage creates opportunities to discover candidates, although hiring growth in an industry does not establish that its workers are available or qualified for a particular vacancy. Employers can widen consideration while applying the same essential capability requirements wherever a candidate has worked.

Consider existing employees before recruiting externally

The search for relevant capability should also include people already inside the organization. As AI changes which skills matter, employees need to understand how their existing expertise connects to emerging responsibilities. Without that connection, a new vacancy may seem inaccessible even to someone with a useful foundation. Hiring and development belong in the same discussion because either route may meet the organization’s needs.

Zeile recommends considering that internal foundation early: “Before looking outside for an emerging capability, CIOs should consider who on their team could grow into new roles with support and guidance,” Zeile said. This asks leaders to examine development potential before committing to external recruitment. External hiring remains appropriate when the expertise required, the time available, or employees’ readiness makes it the better choice.

For employees who could make the transition, the development plan needs concrete support. Time to learn, projects that build emerging skills, and guidance can connect existing expertise to a new role’s responsibilities. Employees can then see what they need to learn and where they will apply it. The organization can use the same plan to judge whether the transition will meet its needs in the time available.

Supported transitions also retain the knowledge employees have built about the business. As Zeile puts it, “That preserves institutional knowledge and makes career development tangible.” A visible route into new responsibilities can also help retain employees. To make that route usable, leaders need to specify the opportunity, the learning involved, and the support employees will receive.

Key takeaways for decision-makers

• Review hiring requirements: CIOs need to review job descriptions and screening criteria together as technology terminology changes. Each requirement should reflect work the role actually involves and recognize relevant experience expressed in older terms.
• Test essential capabilities: Hiring managers can use conversations or practical assessments to resolve gaps left by résumé screening. Define which skills candidates need on arrival and which the organization has the resources to teach.
• Widen recruiting searches: Recruiters can expand geographic and industry coverage while keeping essential capability requirements consistent. Insurance, manufacturing, and consulting offer additional places to look for relevant technical experience.
• Assess internal development options: CIOs need to assess existing employees’ readiness for emerging roles before committing to external recruitment. Provide learning time, relevant projects, and guidance to make transitions credible and retain institutional knowledge.