Research articles and reports

Citi, published October 2023

Abstract 

With AI now upon us and leading us into the “Fourth Industrial Revolution,” this new report notes hiring has evolved from requiring specific education and experience criteria to looking more at detailed skills requirements. The report that follows looks at the changing demand for specific skills in this rapidly changing job market. It discusses the skills that are rising and falling in demand and explores how the wages for these skills are changing. Looking at professional occupations, the authors identify two “soft” skills groups and seven “cognitive” skills groups that are increasingly relevant for the future of work and deemed important based on the frequency in which they appear in job advertisements. Overall, the soft skill collaborative leadership increased in importance over time in terms of demand and hourly wages.

Read here

The Inclusion Initiative, published March 2023

Abstract

Workplaces are changing rapidly, with an increasingly diverse workforce and a lack of talent to fill all the roles, which is why companies across all industries are tackling Diversity & Inclusion within their organisations. Over a dedicated lunch session, The City Quantum Summit addressed D&I in the quantum sector, not least by seeking to learn lessons from the experience of the financial sector, which has been wrestling with the challenge for many more years.

Read here

LSE Business Review, published 17 December 2022

Abstract

Lutfey Siddiqi and Sharmine Tan argue that a holistic, nature-positive lens is the most effective means for private capital to help address climate change. Integrating net-zero initiatives with natural asset stewardship should lead to better outcomes for the planet, businesses, and communities.

Read here

The Inclusion Initiative, published November 2022

Abstract

To understand how to navigate the future of work this study undertook a listening tour of 100 colleagues across financial and professional services, inviting people of all genders and at different stages of their career to participate. UTOPIA allows for workplaces that maximise productivity, while simultaneously embracing diversity, inclusion and the advancement of women.

Read here

Empirical Economics, Published September 2022

Abstract

We consider the extent to which temporal shifts have been responsible for an increased tendency for females to sort into traditionally male roles over time, versus childhood factors. Drawing on three cohort studies, which follow individuals born in the UK in 1958, 1970 and 2000, we compare the shift in the tendency of females in these cohorts to sort into traditionally male roles compared to males, to the combined effect of a large set of childhood variables. For all three cohorts, we find strong evidence of sorting along gendered lines, which has decreased over time, yet there is no erosion of the gender gap in the tendency to sort into occupations with the highest share of males. Within the cohort, we find little evidence that childhood variables change the tendency for females of either the average or highest ability to sort substantively differently. Our work is highly suggestive that temporal shifts are what matter in determining the differential gendered sorting patterns we have seen over the last number of decades, and also those that remain today. These temporal changes include attitudinal changes, technology advances, policy changes and economic shifts.

Read here

Science Direct, published July 2022 

This study explores the effect on mental health and life satisfaction of working in an automatable job. We utilise an Australian panel dataset (HILDA), and estimate models that include individual fixed effects, to estimate the association between automatable work and proxies of wellbeing. Overall, we find evidence that automatable work has a small, detrimental impact on the mental health and life satisfaction of workers within some industries, particularly those with higher levels of job automation risk, such as manufacturing. Furthermore, we find no strong trends to suggest that any particular demographic group is disproportionately impacted across industries. These findings are robust to a variety of specifications. We also find evidence of adaptation to these effects after one-year tenure on the job, indicating a limited role for firm policy.

Read the report

LSE Business Review, published 26 May 2022

Abstract

Firms are increasingly allowing their employees to decide if they work at home or in the office. But the return to work is fraught with many biases. The authors have put together a dictionary of biases in blended work. This is the second dictionary of the series. In this edition, the authors have compiled a list of the most important biases they perceive as impacting the future of work if left unchecked.

Read here

Published May 2022

Abstract

This study identifies the job attributes, and in particular skills and abilities, which predict the likelihood a job is recently automatable drawing on the Josten and Lordan (2020) classification of automatability, EU labour force survey data and a machine learning regression approach. We find that skills and abilities which relate to non-linear abstract thinking are those that are the safest from automation. We also find that jobs that require ‘people’ engagement interacted with ‘brains’ are also less likely to be automated. The skills that are required for these jobs include soft skills. Finally, we find that jobs that require physically making objects or physicality more generally are most likely to be automated unless they involve interaction with ‘brains’ and/or ‘people’.

Read the report

Published May 2022

Abstract

The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the recruitment process is becoming a more common method for organisations to hire new employees. Despite this, there is little consensus on whether AI should have widespread use in the hiring process, and in which contexts. In order to bring more clarity to research findings, we propose the HIRE (Human, (Artificial) Intelligence, Recruitment, Evaluation) framework with the primary aim of evaluating studies which investigate how Artificial Intelligence can be integrated into the recruitment process with respect to gauging whether AI is an adequate, better, or worse substitute for human recruiters. We illustrate the simplicity of this framework by conducting a systematic literature review on the empirical studies assessing AI in the recruitment process, with 22 final papers included. The review shows that AI is equal to or better than human recruiters when it comes to efficiency and performance. We also find that AI is mostly better than humans in improving diversity. Finally, we demonstrate that there is a perception among candidates and recruiters that AI is worse than humans. Overall, we conclude based on the evidence, that AI is equal to or better to humans when utilised in the hiring process, however, humans hold a belief of their own superiority. Our aim is that future authors adopt the HIRE framework when conducting research in this area to allow for easier comparability, and ideally place the HIRE framework outcome of AI being better, equal, worse, or unclear in the abstract.

Read the report

Published April 2022

Abstract

“To understand the causes of things, for the betterment of society.”

It is in this spirit that the three authors embarked on their journeys to write this paper, first conceptualised in August 2021. The paper is intended for investor engagement with companies on the responsible use of AI in hiring and workforce management. At the outset, this paper sought diverse and inclusive viewpoints from a range of stakeholders of the responsible investment ecosystem, for the paper is intended to provide investors’ expectations on ethical artificial intelligence (A.I.) applications in human capital management.

As such, across the paper, you will find expert opinion, insights based on independent surveys and the voices of diverse employees. We hope you enjoy reading this paper and find practical tips on applying human-centric AI. Ultimately, we invite you to join us in making workplace more transparent and inclusive.

Read the report

Published April 2022

Abstract

This study explores the effect on mental health and life satisfaction of working in an automatable job. We utilise an Australian panel dataset (HILDA), and take a fixed effects linear regression approach, to relate a person being in automatable work to proxies of their wellbeing. Overall, we find evidence that automatable work has a small, detrimental impact on the mental health and life satisfaction of workers within some industries, particularly those with higher levels of job automation risk, such as manufacturing. Furthermore, we find no strong trends to suggest that any particular demographic group is disproportionately impacted across industries. These findings are robust to a variety of specifications. We also find evidence of adaptation to these effects after one-year tenure on the job, indicating a limited role for firm policy.

Read the report

Wiley, published Jan 2022

Abstract 

Occupational segregation and pay gaps by gender remain large, while many of the constraints traditionally believed to be responsible for these gaps seem to have weakened over time. We explore the possibility that women and men have different tastes for the content of the work that they do. We relate job satisfaction and job mobility to measures that proxy for the content of the work in an occupation, which we label ‘people’, ‘brains’ and ‘brawn’. The results suggest that women value jobs high on ‘people’ content and low on ‘brawn’. Men care about job content in a similar fashion, but have much weaker preferences. High school students show similar preferences in a discrete choice experiment and indicate that they make their choices based mainly on preferences for the work itself. We argue that the more pronounced preferences of women can account for occupational sorting, which often leads them into careers with large pay penalties for interruptions due to childbearing.

Read the report 

Published 2021

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought with it a debate around which skills will be the most valuable in its aftermath. This study discusses the relevance of social skills in this debate and presents new evidence that shows its necessity. Specifically, we focus on knowledge workers and highlight that the importance of social skills was increasing pre-COVID-19 for these workers and that this importance has increased further during the pandemic, particularly for those in management roles. This study has also emphasised that we are at the beginning of the learning curve in understanding how social skills can be taught effectively to adults, and in particular knowledge workers. Establishing this evidence base is particularly important as governments around the world reconsider their skills agenda as a way to build up their economies post COVID-19.

Read the report