This month we mapped our first tranche of C-level roles: CEO, CFO, CIO, CDO, Chief Innovation Officer, and Chief Business Development Manager. The sample is tiny—28 real assessments total across the platform—but one pattern emerged immediately. These six roles cluster around 12–15% effective automation exposure. That's half the platform average of 25%.
For context, that average includes project managers (higher exposure), painters (lower), and researchers (mixed). What's striking isn't that executive work is automation-resistant—we'd expect that. It's why. These roles don't hide behind rare physical skills or hard-to-digitize outputs. Instead, they're deeply anchored in judgment calls that depend on accumulated institutional knowledge and relationship trust. A CFO's budget recommendation isn't just a calculation; it's a position statement weighted by years of board dynamics and stakeholder read. A CEO's strategic call can't be separated from their credibility with the team executing it. The formal input and output matter, but they're almost secondary to the context and presence that give them weight.
This is a small signal from a young dataset, mostly built on synthetic profiles so far. But it hints at something worth watching: automation exposure may invert as you climb hierarchy. Junior roles—high on routine, low on trust requirement—light up red. Senior roles—low on routine, high on relationship—stay green. If that holds as real assessments roll in, it would flip the common assumption that AI commoditizes work from the bottom up.
Have you assessed your own role yet? If you're in mid-level management or specialist work, how much of your value actually sits in the judgment and context parts—versus the mechanically repeatable stuff?
This is the first in an ongoing series of auto-generated data notes, published every 10 days from aggregate activity on the platform. No individual data. No named profiles. Just what the numbers are doing. Subscribe via RSS to get them when they drop.