Use it responsibly · Guide 9 of 10
Show what you can do with AI, and be honest about how you checked it.
Two reported CEO memos treat AI use as an expectation, so a finished project says more than a line on a CV.
Try this
I study [course] and want a role in [field]. Suggest three small projects I could finish in a weekend using AI. For each, say what I would show an employer.
Hiring has no shared definition of AI literacy, so say exactly what you did and how you checked it.
Try this
Here is how I used AI on this project: [details]. Write two honest CV bullets covering what I did, what AI did and how I checked it. Do not exaggerate.
According to summaries of a survey of about 1,000 employers, AI skills and creative thinking are both expected to grow.
Try this
Interview me for [role] at [company type]. Ask one question at a time, including how I use AI, then tell me how to improve each answer.
Novice support agents gained the most from an AI assistant in one large study, so use it to climb faster, and check its advice with your team.
Try this
I just started as a [role]. Explain [task] to me, list what a senior person would check, and tell me what to ask my manager.
Choose something small that you can finish and show.
Save your key prompts, your mistakes and what you changed.
Explain what you verified yourself. That is the part an interviewer can question you on.
Ask what is allowed before you use AI on their work or in their hiring process.
Employment of 22 to 25-year-olds in AI-exposed jobs is 19% below where it would be had it kept pace with less-exposed peers. The authors say this is descriptive, not causal.
Danish records show no measurable effect on earnings or hours so far, though workers report benefits.
A widely shared MIT-linked figure on AI pilot failure has been criticised for thin methods. Look at the source before you repeat one.
Notes, evidence and sources
6 sources, each with its catch.
Press reports · April 2025
Shopify reportedly made "reflexive AI usage" a baseline, and Duolingo announced an "AI-first" approach.
Two companies' stated intent, not a representative sample.
Two publicly reported CEO memos from 2025 set out expectations. One, from Shopify (April 2025), reportedly made "reflexive AI usage" a baseline expectation, put AI use into performance reviews, and asked teams to show AI cannot do a job before requesting headcount. The other, from Duolingo (28 April 2025), announced an "AI-first" approach.
The memos themselves were not read; these are press reports of two companies' stated intent. They are examples, not a representative sample, and are not an endorsement of either company.
Strength: Weak to moderate
Employment-law commentary
Commentary notes hiring has no shared definition, and job-advert statistics vary by method.
No primary report was opened, so no percentages are given.
Employment-law commentary notes that there is no shared definition of "AI literacy" in hiring. Statistics on how many job adverts mention AI skills exist from several analytics firms, but they vary by method.
No primary advert-analysis report was opened, so this guide reproduces no advert percentages.
Strength: Weak until primary reports are checked
World Economic Forum
According to summaries, AI and big data are among the fastest-growing skills to 2030, in a survey of about 1,000 employers.
Employer expectations. The report page could not be read.
The World Economic Forum Future of Jobs Report 2025 is reported to survey about 1,000 employers covering 14 million workers in 22 industries and 55 economies. According to summaries, AI and big data, networks and cybersecurity, and technological literacy are among the fastest-growing skills to 2030, alongside creative thinking, resilience and flexibility.
The report page could not be read (access refused), so this rests on summaries. These are employer expectations, not outcomes.
Strength: Moderate once verified
Stanford Digital Economy Lab · Revised 12 August 2026
Employment of 22-to-25-year-olds in AI-exposed jobs is 19% below where it would be had it kept pace with less-exposed peers.
The authors call it descriptive, not causal, and the number can move between revisions.
The Stanford Digital Economy Lab paper Canaries in the Coal Mine (Brynjolfsson, Chandar and Chen; revised 12 August 2026) uses ADP payroll data to June 2026. It finds employment of 22-to-25-year-olds in AI-exposed occupations "now stands 19% below where it would be had it kept pace with that of their less-exposed peers."
The authors call these "early, descriptive indicators... rather than causal estimates". The effect weakens with education controls and some trends predate generative AI. The paper has been revised, so the number can move between revisions. No rebuttal was retrieved.
Strength: Moderate, descriptive
Humlum and Vestergaard, NBER · Revised March 2026
Danish labour records show no measurable effect on earnings or hours, ruling out more than 2% two years after ChatGPT launched, though workers report benefits.
One country, early period. Only the abstract page was read.
A study linking adoption surveys to Danish labour records (Humlum and Vestergaard, NBER, revised March 2026) estimates "precise null effects on earnings and recorded hours", "ruling out effects larger than 2% two years after the launch of ChatGPT". Workers still report productivity benefits, and adopters move into higher-paying occupations, "though still too few to move average earnings."
Only the abstract page was read. It covers one country and the early period after ChatGPT launched. It sits awkwardly beside the task-level gains above, which is why it is here.
Strength: Moderate to strong for Denmark
Press reports
A widely reported MIT-linked figure on AI pilot failure has been criticised for thin methodology.
Listed because you will meet it. Not used as evidence here.
A statistic attributed to an MIT report on the failure rate of generative AI pilots was widely reported and has been criticised for thin methodology, a narrow definition of "failure" (no measurable profit-and-loss impact within about six months) and an author tie to a related technology.
This guide does not use the figure as evidence. It is listed here because readers will meet it.
Strength: Weak
No primary hiring-report, no company AI policy and no employer survey with raw data was read. Treat this section as a map of claims to check, not a verdict on what employers want.
1. Shopify and Duolingo CEO memos · April 2025
2. AI skills in job adverts
3. World Economic Forum Future of Jobs 2025
4. Brynjolfsson, Li and Raymond · 2025
5. Canaries in the Coal Mine (Stanford) · Revised 12 August 2026
6. Humlum and Vestergaard · Revised March 2026
7. The MIT-linked pilot-failure statistic