The EU AI Act could affect more than how organisations use artificial intelligence. For UK technology employers working with European markets, it could also influence the capabilities they need and how they build their technology teams.

The key question for employers is not simply whether they need to comply with the legislation. It is whether their existing teams have the right skills to build, implement, secure and manage AI responsibly.

The EU AI Act is being introduced in stages. Some requirements already apply, while others take effect later. From 2 August 2026, the European Commission’s AI Office and national authorities began enforcing provisions that had reached their application date. The 2026 AI Omnibus also extended some later deadlines, including those covering certain high-risk AI systems.

This creates a workforce question: do you have the right capabilities in place as AI becomes part of your technology environment?

Does the EU AI Act Apply to UK Companies?

Being based in the UK does not automatically put an organisation outside the EU AI Act.

Certain obligations can apply to organisations outside the EU, depending on their role, the AI systems they place on the EU market or use within the EU, and whether the output of those systems is used in the EU.

For UK technology businesses operating across European markets, this means understanding which of their AI activities fall within the Act.

The requirements will vary between organisations. A company using a general-purpose AI tool internally will not necessarily face the same requirements as a technology business developing an AI system for use in a regulated environment.

That distinction matters when planning recruitment. Employers need to understand the capabilities their technology actually requires before adding AI or regulatory requirements to a role.

How Could AI Regulation Affect Technology Skills?

The AI Act takes a risk-based approach. The requirements placed on an AI system depend on how it is used and the risks associated with it.

For high-risk systems, requirements can include risk management, data governance, logging, documentation, human oversight, robustness, cybersecurity and accuracy.

This means AI projects can require a wider range of capabilities than software development alone.

A technology team may need expertise across engineering, data, cybersecurity, testing, governance and risk. In some organisations, these capabilities will already exist across different roles. In others, there may be genuine gaps.

The result will not necessarily be a new generation of AI-specific job titles. It may instead change what employers expect from existing technology roles.

AI Skills Are Not Just Technical Skills

AI capability extends beyond people who build machine-learning models.

Research from the Department for Work and Pensions and Skills England in 2026 identifies three broad areas of AI skills: technical, responsible and ethical, and non-technical capabilities. It also found that most roles require a combination of these skills rather than advanced technical expertise alone.

That changes how AI capability should be assessed.

A Software Engineer may need to verify AI-generated code and understand its limitations. A Data Engineer may need stronger data governance knowledge. A Cybersecurity professional may need to understand AI-specific risks. A Technology Manager may need enough understanding of AI and its risks to make informed decisions about technology projects.

These capabilities don’t necessarily require separate hires.

Employers should first establish what their existing teams can already do, where the gaps are and which capabilities genuinely need to be added.

AI Literacy Could Affect Existing Teams

The AI Act also includes an AI literacy obligation.

Article 4 requires providers and deployers of AI systems to take measures to support the AI literacy of staff and others working with AI systems on their behalf. The obligation has applied since February 2025, with supervision and enforcement beginning in August 2026. The European Commission says organisations should consider factors such as technical knowledge, experience, education, training and the context in which the AI system is used.

For employers, the practical implication is that AI capability may need to be developed across existing teams rather than concentrated in a single specialist role.

Some organisations may be able to close capability gaps through training and development. Others may need specialist expertise. Many will need both.

The important question is not whether an organisation has an “AI person”. It is whether the people responsible for its AI systems have the knowledge they need to do their jobs effectively.

Should Employers Hire AI Specialists?

Sometimes. But not automatically.

An organisation might assume that increasing use of AI means it needs to hire an AI specialist. In practice, the required capability may already sit across several technology disciplines.

A Software Engineer may provide the engineering expertise. A Data Engineer may manage data requirements. A Cybersecurity professional may address security risks. A Technology Architect may consider how the AI system fits into the wider technology environment.

Another organisation may genuinely need dedicated AI expertise.

The starting point should therefore be the business and technology problem, not the job title.

This is particularly important when defining specialist vacancies. Combining software engineering, machine learning, cybersecurity, data governance, regulatory compliance and transformation into one role may create a specification that very few candidates can realistically meet.

Hire for Capability, Not Buzzwords

AI experience is becoming an increasingly common requirement in technology vacancies. Adding it to a job description, however, does not necessarily tell employers what a candidate actually needs to do.

A Software Engineer working on an AI-enabled product may need experience with AI-assisted development, testing and verification. A Data Engineer may need experience with data quality and governance. A Cybersecurity specialist may need to understand AI-specific attack surfaces.

These are different capabilities.

Treating them all as “AI skills” can make a role harder to define and harder to recruit for.

A better approach is to identify the outcome the person needs to deliver, then determine which capabilities are essential to achieving it.

That also makes it easier to separate skills that are required on day one from those that can be developed after hiring.

What Does This Mean for Software Engineers?

AI will not affect every Software Engineering role in the same way.

For some engineers, AI may primarily be another tool within the development process. Others may build or maintain AI systems operating in environments with additional requirements around testing, documentation, data, security and human oversight.

This makes “AI experience” a poor standalone measure of suitability.

Someone who regularly uses AI coding tools is not automatically equipped to develop or maintain a regulated AI system.

Employers should instead assess whether candidates understand the technology they are building, can critically evaluate AI-generated output and can work within the technical requirements of the environment.

Data and Cybersecurity Skills Are Also Changing

AI increases the importance of understanding the data behind a system.

For higher-risk AI systems, data quality, governance and documentation can form part of the wider technology responsibility. Depending on the system, Data Engineers may therefore need to understand areas such as data provenance, quality and governance alongside their existing technical skills.

The same applies to cybersecurity.

Cybersecurity and robustness are among the requirements associated with high-risk AI systems. In July 2026, the European Commission also published an Action Plan on Cybersecurity and Artificial Intelligence, highlighting the growing connection between AI and cybersecurity.

For employers, this could increase the value of professionals who understand both areas.

It does not necessarily mean creating new “AI Data” or “AI Cybersecurity” roles. It may mean strengthening the capabilities of existing teams or bringing in specialist expertise where a genuine gap exists.

What About AI Used in Recruitment?

AI regulation is particularly relevant to employers because certain AI systems used in employment are classified as high risk.

The European Commission identifies examples including systems used to place targeted job advertisements, analyse and filter applications and evaluate candidates. However, the classification applies to specific use cases rather than automatically making every AI tool used by a recruitment team high risk.

Understanding the technology’s actual use is therefore important.

An AI tool used somewhere in the recruitment process does not automatically create the same regulatory requirements as an AI system used to evaluate candidates.

Where AI is used for screening, evaluation or other employment-related decisions, employers may need closer collaboration between Talent, HR, Technology, Data, Legal and Compliance teams.

When Do the High-Risk Employment Rules Apply?

The timing gives employers an opportunity to prepare.

Following the 2026 AI Omnibus changes, the rules for high-risk AI systems covered by Annex III are scheduled to apply from 2 December 2027. This includes the relevant employment-related use cases covered by the framework.

Employers can use the time before these requirements apply to understand which AI systems they use, what those systems do, who is responsible for them and whether the necessary capabilities exist within their teams.

That assessment can inform workforce planning before a skills gap becomes a recruitment problem.

Avoid Creating an Impossible Technology Role

AI can make job descriptions more complicated very quickly.

An employer may want someone who understands software engineering, machine learning, cybersecurity, data governance, regulatory requirements, risk management and business transformation.

That may sound comprehensive, but it can also describe an unrealistic candidate.

The more requirements a role combines, the smaller the pool of genuinely suitable candidates becomes. It can also become difficult to distinguish between capabilities that are essential and those that would simply be useful.

Employers should start with the outcome they need.

From there, they can identify the capabilities required, determine what already exists within the team and decide whether the remaining gap should be addressed through development, recruitment, contracting or specialist support.

What Should Technology Employers Do Now?

The EU AI Act does not mean every UK technology employer needs to restructure its workforce.

It does mean organisations should understand how AI is being used across their technology environment and consider whether their teams have the capabilities required to support it.

That means looking at the systems being developed or deployed, the markets they serve and the responsibilities attached to them.

Employers can then assess their existing capability and identify genuine gaps.

Some gaps may be addressed through upskilling. Others may require changes to existing responsibilities. Some may justify a permanent hire, while others may be better suited to contractors or specialist project support.

The important thing is to make that decision based on the capability the organisation actually needs.

Key Takeaways

• AI regulation is changing the capabilities technology employers need, not necessarily creating demand for entirely new roles.
• AI capability extends beyond technical expertise, with existing roles increasingly needing relevant data, cybersecurity, governance and AI knowledge.
• Employers should define the capability they need before defining the vacancy, particularly where several technology disciplines overlap.
• Not every capability gap requires recruitment; employers can consider upskilling, changing responsibilities, contractors or specialist support.
• Hiring should focus on genuine capability gaps, rather than adding broad AI requirements to existing technology roles.

Technology employers have spent years competing for people with scarce technical skills. Software Engineers, Cybersecurity specialists, Data Engineers, Cloud Engineers and other technology professionals remain essential to organisations across the UK.

The next technology skills shortage, however, may look different.

As artificial intelligence changes how technology work gets done, employers may increasingly need people who can combine technical expertise with judgement, problem-solving, communication and adaptability.

Technical skills are not becoming less important. The challenge is that employers may need a broader combination of capabilities from the people who use them.

For hiring teams, that changes the question from “Which technical skill do we need?” to “What capabilities does this role actually require?”

Why Are Technology Skills Changing?

The UK technology workforce is still expected to grow significantly.

Skills England’s 2026 Sector Skills Needs Assessment projects that employment across 30 priority occupations within the digital and technologies sector will grow by 239,000 jobs, or 27%, between 2025 and 2035. It also estimates 249,000 replacement workers will be needed over the same period, bringing total estimated demand to around 488,000 workers.

The assessment also highlights how AI could change the nature of technology work. As AI-enabled tools become more capable, some routine coding and testing tasks may shift towards activities such as oversight, assurance, verification and judgement.

That does not remove the need for technical expertise. Instead, it changes where that expertise creates value.

A Software Engineer may spend less time completing routine coding tasks but more time reviewing generated code and making technical decisions. A Cybersecurity professional may use AI to identify potential threats while remaining responsible for assessing whether those findings are accurate. A Data professional may automate parts of a workflow while still needing to understand data quality and context.

The technology changes the workflow. The need for people who understand the work remains.

Which Skills Will Technology Employers Need?

Technical knowledge increasingly sits alongside broader capabilities.

Skills England’s 2026 Annual Skills Report highlights communication, critical thinking and analytical skills as important capabilities as workers adapt to AI. It also stresses the need for workers to develop the skills needed to use AI effectively as its role in the workplace grows.

For technology employers, these are not simply generic soft skills.

Judgement matters when an engineer needs to decide whether AI-generated code is safe to deploy. Communication matters when an Architect needs to explain a technical decision to senior stakeholders. Problem-solving matters when an AI-enabled system produces an unexpected result.

As more routine activity becomes automated, the ability to understand context and make sound decisions can become more important.

That means hiring teams may need to assess how candidates apply their technical knowledge, rather than focusing only on the technologies listed on their CV.

Could Human Judgement Become More Valuable?

AI can produce an answer quickly. That does not necessarily make the answer correct, appropriate or useful.

This makes the ability to evaluate information increasingly important.

UK Government research published in 2026 found that AI skills span both specialist technical expertise and broader workplace capabilities. The research identifies different levels of AI users, from AI experts and specialists to professionals who implement AI in their existing roles, highlighting the need for people to develop the skills required to use and evaluate AI effectively.

This reinforces the importance of looking beyond technical keywords.

A candidate may have extensive experience with a particular programming language or platform, but employers also need to understand how that person approaches unfamiliar problems, evaluates information and responds when a technology does not behave as expected.

The strongest candidate will not always be the one with the longest technical checklist.

Are Skills Shortages Becoming Capability Shortages?

A traditional skills shortage suggests that employers cannot find enough people with a particular skill.

The emerging problem may be more complicated.

An organisation might be able to find Software Engineers with strong coding experience but struggle to find people who can combine software development with AI-assisted workflows, quality assurance and effective communication.

It could find Project Managers with extensive delivery experience but fewer candidates who can manage technology programmes involving AI, changing processes and uncertain requirements.

The organisation does not necessarily have a shortage of people with individual skills.

It may have a shortage of people with the right combination of capabilities.

That distinction matters because it changes how employers should define vacancies.

Instead of continually adding requirements to an existing job description, hiring teams should identify which capabilities genuinely determine success in the role.

Should Employers Hire for Potential?

Hiring for potential can help employers respond to changing skills requirements, but it should not become an excuse to overlook genuine technical requirements.

The right balance depends on the role.

A highly specialised position may require significant expertise from day one. Other roles may allow an employer to hire someone with strong technical foundations and develop more specific skills over time.

This approach can also widen the candidate pool without compromising the capabilities the role genuinely requires.

The same principle applies to existing employees. If a capability can realistically be developed internally, reskilling may be more practical than competing for a small pool of candidates who already possess every emerging skill.

What Should Employers Look For?

Technology employers should increasingly assess how candidates apply their knowledge, not simply how many technologies they can list on a CV.

Technical assessment remains important. Candidates still need to demonstrate the expertise required for the role.

However, employers should also consider how candidates approach unfamiliar problems, explain technical decisions, evaluate information and work with people outside their immediate specialism.

The ability to learn matters too. Technology tools and workflows can change quickly, making adaptability increasingly valuable.

Someone who has worked with one particular technology may not always be the strongest long-term hire. A candidate with strong technical foundations, sound judgement and a demonstrated ability to learn may adapt more effectively as the technology environment changes.

The Next Technology Skills Shortage May Be About Capability

Technical skills shortages are not disappearing.

The UK will continue to need people who can build software, secure systems, manage infrastructure, analyse data and deliver technology change. What is changing is the combination of skills employers need from those people.

AI can automate parts of technical work, but organisations still need professionals who understand the underlying technology, evaluate outputs, solve unfamiliar problems and take responsibility for results.

Introduction

Technology roles are becoming harder to define.

Businesses are adopting new technologies, changing operating models and asking technology teams to solve increasingly complex problems. As a result, a vacancy that once had a straightforward remit can quickly become a combination of technical delivery, strategy, leadership, security, infrastructure and business change.

The problem is that trying to find one person who can do everything can make recruitment less effective.

An overly broad role can reduce the number of suitable candidates, increase salary expectations and make it difficult to assess whether someone is genuinely right for the position. It can also leave the successful candidate with competing priorities and unclear expectations.

For Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs), where every senior technology hire can have a significant impact, defining the role correctly before recruitment begins is particularly important.

Start With the Problem

The starting point for a technology hire should not necessarily be a job title.

It should be the problem the business needs someone to solve.

An organisation might initially decide that it needs a Head of IT. However, the underlying requirement could actually be to modernise infrastructure, improve cybersecurity, establish technology governance or prepare the business for growth.

Those requirements may need very different capabilities.

Starting with the problem allows employers to establish what the person will actually be expected to achieve. It also makes it easier to determine whether the requirement calls for a permanent hire, a specialist contractor, an interim leader or additional support around an existing team.

This approach is becoming more important as technology roles continue to change. The UK Standard Skills Classification, published by Skills England in 2026, provides a common framework for describing the skills, tasks and knowledge required across UK occupations and contains 3,350 occupational skills.

Separate Responsibilities From Capabilities

A common mistake is to build a vacancy by combining every responsibility currently sitting within the technology function.

For example, an SME might look for someone responsible for:

IT operations, cloud infrastructure, cybersecurity, software development, vendor management, data, project delivery and technology strategy.

Each area is legitimate. The problem is expecting one person to provide senior-level expertise across all of them.

Employers should instead distinguish between responsibilities and capabilities.

A technology leader may need enough knowledge of cybersecurity to manage risk without being a cybersecurity specialist. A CTO may need to understand infrastructure without personally managing it. An IT Director may oversee transformation without being the organisation’s principal project manager.

This distinction helps employers identify the level of expertise genuinely required rather than building an unrealistic list of requirements.

Define What Success Looks Like

A strong technology job description should explain what the successful candidate is expected to change.

This is particularly important for senior appointments.

“Responsible for IT strategy” tells a candidate very little. “Develop and implement a technology strategy that supports the company’s next stage of growth” provides considerably more context.

The same principle applies to technical roles.

Instead of simply listing technologies, employers should consider what the person needs to achieve with them. Is the objective to reduce technical debt? Improve resilience? Build a scalable platform? Improve security? Reduce operational costs?

The answer changes the type of candidate required.

It also gives candidates a better opportunity to assess whether their experience is relevant.

Avoid the Perfect Candidate

Technology recruitment can become unnecessarily difficult when employers try to create a specification for an ideal candidate rather than a realistic one.

This often happens when desirable experience gradually becomes essential. A vacancy starts with five genuine requirements and ends with fifteen.

The result can be a highly experienced candidate who meets most of the requirements being rejected because they have not worked with one particular platform or technology.

This approach is particularly important in a rapidly changing market. Skills England’s 2026 Digital and Technologies assessment found that priority technology occupations require higher-than-average proficiency in digital literacy, learning and investigating, creating, problem-solving and decision-making. It also found that AI adoption is reshaping digital roles and workflows, with greater emphasis on adaptability, accountability, collaboration and the effective use of AI alongside technical expertise.

For employers, this means assessing whether a candidate has demonstrated the ability to solve comparable problems can be more useful than requiring an exact match against every technology in the environment.

Consider the Team Around the Role

A role should not be assessed in isolation.

Before recruiting, employers should consider the capabilities already available within the organisation.

If an SME already has strong infrastructure engineers, for example, its next hire may need to provide leadership rather than additional infrastructure expertise.

Likewise, if the business has a capable IT team but lacks strategic direction, recruiting another technical specialist may not address the underlying problem.

Understanding the existing team also helps establish where responsibilities should sit.

This can prevent senior hires from becoming overloaded with operational work that could be delegated while also being expected to deliver strategic change.

Don’t Build Tomorrow’s Role Around Yesterday’s Structure

Technology teams should evolve with the business.

An organisation that has grown significantly may still have a technology structure designed for a much smaller company. Roles that once made sense can gradually accumulate additional responsibilities until they become difficult to recruit for.

The wider UK technology market is also changing. Skills England’s assessment mentioned above also projects a 27% increase in employment across 30 priority digital and technology occupations between 2025 and 2035, alongside an estimated 249,000 workers needed to replace people leaving these occupations.

For employers, this makes workforce planning more important. The question should not simply be “Who can manage what we have today?” It should also be “What capability will the business need as it grows?”

That does not necessarily mean hiring a more senior person. It may mean separating responsibilities that have become too broad or creating a role that did not previously exist.

Get the Market View Before Advertising

One of the most useful points at which to involve a specialist recruitment partner is before the vacancy formally exists.

An employer may have a clear idea of the problem but an inaccurate idea of the role needed to solve it. Speaking to people with knowledge of the technology talent market can help test those assumptions before they become part of a job description.

That conversation can establish whether the proposed combination of skills is realistic, whether the level of seniority matches the responsibility and whether the organisation is likely to find the required capability within its target market.

This is particularly valuable for SMEs, which may not regularly recruit senior technology professionals.

The UK’s 2026 SME Digital Adoption Taskforce update highlights capability, cost and awareness as key barriers to SME digital adoption, reinforcing the importance of having the right expertise to support technology decisions.

Early consultation can therefore save time later. It can help an employer decide what it actually needs before spending weeks searching for a candidate who may not exist.

Build a Role Someone Can Succeed In

Defining a technology role correctly is not about making the job description shorter.

It is about making the requirement clearer.

The strongest roles have a defined purpose, realistic responsibilities and an appropriate balance between technical expertise, leadership and business understanding. They give the successful candidate enough authority to deliver what they were hired to achieve.

That benefits both sides of the recruitment process.

Employers gain a clearer basis for assessing candidates. Candidates gain a better understanding of what they are being asked to do. The eventual hire is more likely to enter the organisation with realistic expectations and a clear definition of success.

Conclusion

A difficult technology vacancy is not always evidence of a difficult talent market.

Sometimes the real problem is that the organisation is trying to hire one person to solve several different problems.

For SMEs, the consequences can be significant. A senior technology hire represents a substantial investment, and a poorly defined role can lead to a long recruitment process, limited candidate choice or a placement that fails to deliver what the business actually needed.

The solution is to start earlier.

Define the problem. Understand the capability required. Assess the existing team. Separate essential skills from desirable experience. Then test the role against the market before taking it to candidates.

The best technology recruitment processes do not begin with a job advert.

They begin with a clear understanding of what the business needs someone to achieve.

Key Takeaways

• Start with the business problem, not the job title.
• Separate responsibilities from specialist capabilities.
• Define measurable outcomes before defining candidate requirements.
• Avoid turning desirable experience into an unrealistic wish list.
• Consider the capabilities already available within the technology team.
• Review whether existing roles still fit the organisation’s current stage of growth.
• Get an informed view of the talent market before formally opening a difficult vacancy.
• Build roles around what the successful candidate can realistically achieve.

Moving data infrastructure to the cloud can change how an organisation stores, processes and uses its data. The technology matters, but the people delivering the migration can have just as much impact on its success.

Hiring the right Data Engineers therefore requires more than looking for experience with a particular cloud platform. Employers need to understand the migration itself, the existing data environment and the skills required to move between the two.

The right candidate should be able to work with the organisation’s current infrastructure while helping build a reliable and scalable future-state environment.

Understand What the Migration Actually Requires

Before recruiting, employers need a clear view of what the cloud migration involves.

A straightforward migration may require engineers to move existing pipelines and data workloads into a cloud environment. A larger transformation could involve redesigning data architecture, rebuilding pipelines, integrating new platforms and changing how teams access and use data.

Those differences have a direct impact on recruitment.

A Data Engineer who has experience maintaining cloud-based pipelines may be well suited to one project but may not have the architecture or migration experience required for another.

The hiring process should therefore start with the migration requirements rather than a generic Data Engineer job description.

Look for Relevant Cloud Experience

Cloud experience is likely to be important, but employers should be specific about what they actually need.

Experience with AWS, Microsoft Azure or Google Cloud can demonstrate familiarity with cloud environments, but the platform alone does not determine whether someone can successfully support a migration.

Candidates should be able to explain how they have used cloud technology in practice. This could include building data pipelines, managing storage, working with cloud databases, improving performance or supporting large-scale data processing.

The depth of experience matters more than simply having a cloud platform listed on a CV.

Assess Migration Experience

Cloud migration introduces challenges that do not necessarily appear in day-to-day data engineering.

Engineers may need to understand legacy systems, map existing data flows, identify dependencies and decide how workloads should move into the new environment. They may also need to manage migration risks while keeping existing services operational.

Candidates who have supported previous migrations can bring valuable experience because they understand that moving data is rarely just a matter of transferring files from one system to another.

During interviews, ask candidates to explain a migration they have worked on. What was the starting environment? What problems did they encounter? How did they approach dependencies, testing and data quality?

These questions can reveal far more than a list of migration technologies.

Assess Data Pipeline Skills

Data pipelines sit at the centre of many cloud migration projects.

Engineers may need to build new pipelines, adapt existing ones or move workloads between different platforms. They need to understand how data moves through the organisation and how changes to one part of the environment can affect another.

Look for candidates who can explain the design decisions behind their pipelines rather than simply naming the tools they have used.

Experience with technologies such as SQL, Python, ETL or ELT processes, orchestration and cloud data platforms may all be relevant, depending on the project.

The important question is whether the candidate can apply those skills to the organisation’s specific migration requirements.

Don’t Overlook Data Quality

A successful migration is not simply about moving data from one environment to another.

The organisation also needs confidence that the data remains accurate, complete and usable after the move.

Data Engineers may therefore need to identify inconsistencies, validate migrated data and build processes that detect problems before they affect users.

This makes data quality experience particularly valuable when assessing candidates.

Ask how candidates have previously identified or resolved data-quality problems. Their answers can help reveal whether they understand the wider impact of poor data rather than treating quality as a final testing exercise.

Consider Security and Governance

Moving data into the cloud can introduce new security and governance considerations.

The Data Engineer may work with sensitive customer, financial or operational information. Depending on the organisation and the project, they may need to understand access controls, encryption, data retention and regulatory requirements.

Employers should therefore consider these requirements when defining the role.

The UK’s 2026 Digital and Technologies Sector Skills Needs Assessment highlights the growing importance of data, cybersecurity and other digital capabilities as technology continues to change.

The level of security knowledge required will vary, but candidates should understand that data engineering decisions can have consequences beyond the technical environment.

Look for Problem-Solving Ability

Migration projects rarely follow the original plan perfectly.

Legacy systems may behave differently than expected. Data dependencies may be poorly documented. Performance can change after migration, while previously hidden quality problems can emerge during testing.

Strong Data Engineers need to investigate these problems and find practical solutions.

Interview questions should therefore explore how candidates have handled unexpected technical issues. Ask what happened, how they investigated the problem and why they chose their eventual solution.

This provides evidence of how they think rather than simply confirming that they have worked with a particular technology.

Seniority Matters

Not every cloud migration requires a senior Data Engineer, but larger or more complex projects may need people who can make decisions beyond individual pipelines.

Senior engineers may need to contribute to architecture decisions, establish engineering standards, review technical approaches and help less experienced team members.

They may also need to communicate with architects, project managers, security specialists and business stakeholders.

The more complex the migration, the more important it becomes to distinguish between someone who can execute defined tasks and someone who can help shape the technical approach.

Consider the Existing Technology Environment

The ideal candidate depends partly on what the organisation already has.

A business moving from on-premise SQL Server into Azure will have different requirements from an organisation migrating a large distributed data platform into AWS.

Existing technology, internal skills and the target architecture should therefore influence the recruitment profile.

This also prevents employers from creating unnecessarily broad specifications. Requiring experience across every major cloud platform, database technology and data tool may make the vacancy look comprehensive, but it can also exclude candidates who have the right transferable experience.

Decide What Can Be Learned

Cloud technology changes quickly, so employers should distinguish between skills that genuinely need to be present on day one and those that can be developed.

A candidate may have strong migration experience on Azure but little experience with AWS. Another may have extensive AWS experience but limited exposure to the organisation’s preferred data platform.

Neither should automatically be ruled out.

Strong data engineering fundamentals, problem-solving ability and experience working with complex data environments can transfer between technologies. The recruitment process should identify which gaps are manageable and which would create a genuine delivery risk.

Use Practical Technical Assessments

Technical assessments can help employers test whether candidates can apply their experience to a realistic migration problem.

Rather than asking candidates to recall definitions, give them a scenario. They might need to explain how they would approach moving a legacy data pipeline into the cloud, identify potential risks or suggest how they would validate the migrated data.

The aim is not necessarily to find one perfect answer.

A strong assessment should reveal how the candidate thinks, what questions they ask and whether they recognise the technical and business consequences of their decisions.

Hire for the Migration You Actually Have

There is no single Data Engineer profile that fits every cloud migration.

A small migration may need an experienced engineer who can execute a well-defined technical plan. A complex transformation may require senior engineers who can work across architecture, data, security and delivery.

The recruitment process should reflect that difference.

Employers that define the migration first can build a much more accurate candidate profile. They can then assess candidates against the skills that genuinely matter rather than relying on long technology lists or generic cloud experience.

What Should Employers Look for in a Data Engineer for Cloud Migration?

The strongest candidates combine solid data engineering fundamentals with relevant cloud experience, problem-solving ability and an understanding of migration challenges.

They should be able to explain their previous work, understand the impact of their technical decisions and adapt their approach when the environment changes.

For employers, successful hiring starts before the vacancy is advertised. Understanding the migration, identifying the capabilities required and separating essential skills from those that can be learned will create a stronger basis for finding the right Data Engineer.

A good cloud migration depends on good technology, but it also depends on having the right people to move it forward.

AI is changing software development, but that does not mean every Software Engineer needs to become an AI specialist.

For employers, the more useful question is how a candidate uses AI within their existing engineering work. Can they use AI tools to improve productivity? Can they check the output? Do they understand the risks? Can they recognise when an AI-generated solution is wrong?

These questions are becoming more important as AI becomes part of everyday software development. Hiring teams need to assess both traditional engineering ability and the new skills that allow developers to work effectively with AI.

What AI Skills Should Software Engineers Have?

The right AI skills depend on the role.

A Software Engineer might use AI to generate code, explain unfamiliar systems, write tests, identify bugs or speed up routine development work. A senior engineer may also need to review AI-generated solutions, assess their risks and decide where AI should be used within the development process.

Skills England’s 2026 research shows that AI is changing software development, with greater emphasis on verification, oversight, judgement and communication as AI takes on more routine development tasks.

For employers, this means that AI experience should not become another keyword to add to a job description. The important question is what the candidate can actually do with AI and how well they understand its limitations.

Look at How Candidates Use AI

Asking whether a candidate has used ChatGPT, GitHub Copilot or another AI development tool will tell you very little on its own.

Instead, ask how they use those tools.

A strong candidate should be able to explain when AI helps them, when they avoid using it and how they check its output. They should also understand that an AI tool can produce an answer that looks convincing without being technically correct.

This distinction matters because effective AI use requires more than knowing which button to press. Software Engineers still need to understand the problem, assess the proposed solution and remain responsible for the result.

Assess AI-Assisted Code Review

One of the most useful ways to assess AI skills is to look at how candidates review generated code.

AI can produce functional-looking code that contains bugs, security weaknesses, inefficient logic or design problems. An engineer therefore needs enough technical understanding to question the output rather than accept it automatically.

A practical recruitment exercise could give candidates a piece of code and ask them to identify potential problems, explain their reasoning and suggest improvements. The code could come from an AI tool, but it does not have to. The objective is to assess engineering judgement.

This approach also avoids turning the interview into a test of whether someone knows a particular AI product.

Don’t Confuse AI Tool Experience With AI Expertise

A candidate who has used AI extensively is not automatically more capable than one who has only recently started using it.

Tool experience can be useful, but employers should distinguish between familiarity and capability.

The UK Government’s 2026 AI Labour Market Survey identifies significant skills gaps and evolving skills requirements within the AI sector, highlighting the growing challenge of finding people with the capabilities organisations need.

For Software Engineer recruitment, this means employers should define the level of AI capability they actually need rather than assuming that more tool experience always means a better candidate.

Test Software Engineering Without AI

AI skills should add to strong engineering fundamentals, not replace them.

Candidates still need to understand software design, debugging, testing, architecture and the principles behind the systems they build. They should also be able to reason through a technical problem when an AI tool cannot provide a useful answer.

This is particularly important when hiring senior engineers. Someone who relies heavily on AI but cannot explain the underlying solution may struggle when a system behaves unexpectedly or when the generated answer does not fit the organisation’s architecture.

Technical assessments should therefore test understanding as well as output.

Assess Security and Responsible AI Use

Software Engineers may work with source code, customer information, credentials, intellectual property and other sensitive data. Using AI tools can introduce additional risks if employees do not understand how those tools handle information.

Responsible AI use should therefore form part of the assessment for relevant roles.

The UK’s 2026 AI Skills for Life and Work employer research identifies different levels of AI capability across organisations, including people who use AI tools, implement AI models and develop AI models.

For employers, this reinforces the importance of defining what AI responsibility looks like within the specific role.

An interview could explore how a candidate would decide whether to put a piece of proprietary code into an AI tool, how they would validate an AI-generated answer or what they would do if an AI-assisted solution introduced a security concern.

Senior Engineers Need More Than Tool Knowledge

The level of AI capability required should increase with the level of responsibility.

A junior Software Engineer may need to understand how to use approved AI tools safely and check the work they produce. A Senior Software Engineer may need to make decisions about where AI fits into development workflows and how teams should review AI-assisted work.

Engineering Leads and senior technical specialists may need to consider wider questions around architecture, security, governance, quality and accountability.

That means employers should avoid using one generic definition of “AI skills” across every Software Engineering vacancy.

Use AI in the Assessment Process Carefully

AI has also changed the way employers assess candidates.

Traditional coding tests can become less useful if candidates can simply ask an AI tool to produce a solution. However, banning AI entirely may create an artificial assessment that does not reflect the working environment.

A better approach is to decide what the assessment is intended to measure.

If the goal is to assess independent technical reasoning, give candidates an opportunity to demonstrate that without AI assistance. If the goal is to understand how they work with AI, allow appropriate tools and assess how they verify and improve the results.

The assessment should reflect the actual expectations of the role.

Look for Learning and Adaptability

AI tools will continue to change. A candidate who knows one particular coding assistant today may need to work with a completely different tool in the future.

Employers should therefore look for people who can learn, experiment and adapt rather than focusing too heavily on a fixed list of AI products.

2026 research from the UK Government and Skills England highlights the need for employers to build workforce capability so that people can use AI effectively, safely and responsibly.

For Software Engineer recruitment, that makes learning ability particularly valuable. The strongest candidate may not have used every tool an organisation currently uses, but they should be able to understand new technology and work out how to use it responsibly.

Don’t Add AI Requirements Just for the Sake of It

There is a risk that employers will start adding “AI experience” to every Software Engineer vacancy simply because AI is becoming important.

That can unnecessarily reduce the candidate pool.

A Software Engineer developing machine-learning systems will need very different AI expertise from a full-stack developer who uses AI to support coding, testing and documentation. Treating both roles as requiring the same AI background makes the recruitment process less accurate.

Before advertising a role, hiring teams should establish what AI will actually mean for the person’s day-to-day work.

That makes it easier to distinguish genuine requirements from desirable experience.

What Should Employers Look for When Hiring Software Engineers?

AI is changing the skills employers need from Software Engineers, but the fundamentals of good engineering remain.

The strongest candidates will combine technical knowledge with problem-solving, judgement and the ability to work effectively with new tools. They should understand what AI can do, where it can create problems and when human review remains essential.

For hiring teams, the goal is not to find the candidate who uses AI the most. It is to find someone who can use AI productively without losing the engineering judgement needed to build reliable, secure and maintainable software.

As AI becomes a normal part of software development, that ability to combine technical expertise with responsible AI use is likely to become an increasingly important part of Software Engineer recruitment.

Small and medium-sized businesses (SMEs) often assume that attracting experienced technology professionals requires competing with larger organisations on salary alone.

That can be difficult. Larger employers may have bigger technology teams, larger recruitment budgets and more established career structures.

The UK technology labour market is already under significant pressure. Skills England estimates that 68% of priority digital and technology occupations are currently in critical or elevated demand, while total demand across 30 priority occupations is projected to reach around 488,000 workers between 2025 and 2035 when growth and replacement demand are combined.

However, salary is only one part of what experienced technology candidates consider when choosing their next role.

For SMEs, the opportunity is to compete differently.

Interesting technical problems, greater responsibility, access to decision-makers, flexibility and the opportunity to make a visible impact can all make a smaller organisation attractive. The challenge is understanding what the business can realistically offer and communicating it clearly during the recruitment process.

For employers competing for specialist technology talent, the question is therefore not simply how to offer more. It is how to offer something different.

Understand What Candidates Value

Experienced technology professionals are unlikely to assess a role based on salary alone.

The nature of the work, the technology environment, leadership, flexibility and opportunities to develop can all influence whether someone considers a position worthwhile.

Flexible working is also a significant part of the employment proposition for highly skilled workers. UK Government research found that 86% of employees in high-skill occupations had access to some form of flexible working.

This can work in an SME’s favour.

A senior technology professional may have more influence in a business where technology is still developing than they would in a large organisation with established teams and layers of management.

For the right candidate, being able to shape architecture, introduce new systems, establish processes or influence technology strategy can be a significant attraction.

The key is to understand what the role genuinely offers rather than relying on generic statements about culture or career development.

Sell the Opportunity, Not the Size

An SME cannot always compete with a multinational on salary or benefits. It can, however, compete on the scope of the opportunity.

A candidate should be able to understand what they will be responsible for, what problems they will be expected to solve and what influence they will have.

For example, a senior engineer might prefer a role where they can influence technical direction rather than simply deliver within a narrowly defined function.

Similarly, an experienced IT leader may be attracted to an organisation where they can build a technology function rather than inherit one that is already established.

This makes the role itself part of the recruitment proposition.

Be Clear About Flexibility

Flexible working is now an established consideration for many technology professionals, but simply advertising a role as “hybrid” is unlikely to differentiate an employer.

Businesses should be clear about what flexibility actually means.

How often is someone expected in the office? Is the arrangement genuinely flexible? Can working patterns change when circumstances require it? Does the business support remote collaboration effectively?

Being precise gives candidates a more realistic understanding of the opportunity and reduces the likelihood of mismatched expectations later.

Give Technology a Voice

Senior technology candidates want to know whether technology is taken seriously by the wider business.

An SME may offer an attractive role, but if technology leadership has little influence over commercial decisions, investment or organisational planning, experienced candidates may question how much they can actually achieve.

Where technology is important to business growth, candidates should be able to see how their work connects to wider objectives.

This is particularly important when recruiting senior roles such as Heads of IT, CTOs, technology leaders and transformation specialists.

The CIPD’s 2026 guidance on AI and technology emphasises the importance of involving the right people in technology decisions and considering how new technology will affect jobs and working practices.

The candidate is not simply evaluating the job. They are evaluating whether the organisation will allow them to succeed.

Avoid Overloading the Job Description

SMEs can unintentionally make recruitment harder by trying to find one person who can do everything.

A vacancy might ask for infrastructure, cloud, cybersecurity, applications, project management, vendor management and strategic leadership experience in a single role.

The result is often a candidate profile that barely exists.

Before advertising, employers should separate essential capabilities from desirable experience. They should also consider which skills can be developed after joining and which genuinely require previous experience.

This is particularly important as technology roles continue to change. The UK Government’s 2026 AI Labour Market Survey found that 97% of organisations surveyed identified at least one AI skills gap, with both technical and non-technical capabilities affected.

This is particularly important in specialist technology recruitment, where transferable skills can be more valuable than an exact match against every technology listed in a job description.

Make the Recruitment Process Match the Role

An SME can lose strong candidates through a recruitment process that is unnecessarily slow or unclear.

Technology professionals with specialist skills are likely to have other options. Long gaps between interviews, unclear decision-making and changing requirements can make an otherwise attractive role less appealing.

The wider UK labour market does not remove this pressure. The CIPD’s Summer 2026 Labour Market Outlook found that only 62% of employers planned to recruit over the following three months, with many businesses concentrating on maintaining existing staffing levels.

The process should therefore reflect the organisation’s priorities.

Candidates should understand what the business is looking for, who they will meet, how decisions will be made and what the expected timescale is.

A well-structured process also helps the employer assess candidates more effectively rather than relying on repeated interviews that add little new information.

Recruit for Impact

One of the strongest advantages an SME can offer is the opportunity to see the results of someone’s work.

In a smaller organisation, a technology professional may be able to introduce a new platform, improve security, modernise infrastructure or establish a development function and see the impact directly.

Employers should therefore explain what success looks like.

Instead of simply describing responsibilities, explain what the person will have the opportunity to change.

That gives experienced candidates a clearer reason to join and gives the organisation a stronger basis for assessing whether someone is genuinely suited to the role.

Know When You Need Specialist Advice

Some technology vacancies are difficult because the market is difficult. Others are difficult because the role has not been defined clearly enough.

This can happen when an SME knows it needs senior technology expertise but is uncertain whether it needs a CTO, Head of IT, Transformation Director, architect or another specialist.

Engaging specialist advice before the vacancy is formally opened can help clarify the capability required, establish realistic expectations and identify where the available talent market may differ from the organisation’s initial assumptions.

That early work can also prevent businesses from spending weeks recruiting for a role that was unlikely to attract the right candidates in the first place.

Compete on What You Can Offer

SMEs do not need to become larger employers to compete for technology talent.

They need to understand what makes their opportunity valuable and present it honestly.

For some candidates, that may be influence and autonomy. For others, it may be flexibility, technical challenge, career progression or the opportunity to build something from the ground up.

The strongest approach is not to imitate the largest employers. It is to identify where a smaller organisation can offer a better professional opportunity and build the recruitment process around that.

Conclusion

Technology talent does not automatically choose the biggest employer.

Experienced professionals choose roles where the work, environment and opportunity make sense for their career. An SME may have less financial scale than a large organisation, but it can often offer greater influence, broader responsibility and a more visible connection between an individual’s work and business outcomes.

The challenge is making those advantages clear.

For employers, that starts before a vacancy is advertised. Defining the role properly, understanding the available talent, setting realistic requirements and communicating the opportunity clearly can have as much influence on recruitment success as the salary attached to the position.

Competing for technology talent is therefore not simply a question of offering more.

It is about understanding what the right candidate values — and building a role that gives them a compelling reason to choose your organisation.

Key Takeaways

• SMEs do not have to compete on salary alone. Scope, autonomy, flexibility and influence can make smaller employers attractive.
• The role itself is part of the recruitment proposition. Candidates need to understand what they will be able to achieve.
• Avoid unrealistic wish lists. Prioritise genuine requirements and consider transferable skills.
• Be specific about flexibility. Clear expectations help attract suitable candidates and prevent mismatches.
• Technology candidates need confidence in the organisation. Senior professionals want to know that they will have the support and influence needed to succeed.
• A strong recruitment process matters. Delays and unclear decision-making can cause employers to lose candidates.
• Define difficult roles before advertising them. Specialist advice can help establish what capability is actually required and what the market can realistically provide.

Hiring the right Business Analyst can be difficult because job titles do not always tell you what someone has actually done.

Two candidates might both have “Business Analyst” on their CVs while having very different experience. One may have spent most of their career documenting requirements. Another may have worked across complex transformation programmes, challenged existing processes and helped shape the solution.

For employers, assessing Business Analysis experience therefore requires more than matching keywords on a CV. The focus should be on what the candidate has delivered, the problems they have solved and how they have worked with stakeholders.

Look Beyond the Job Title

Business Analyst roles can vary significantly between organisations.

Some positions focus heavily on requirements gathering and process mapping. Others involve strategy, technology implementation, business change, data, product development or large-scale transformation.

The job title alone cannot tell you which type of experience a candidate has.

When reviewing applications, look for evidence of the candidate’s responsibilities and outcomes. A strong CV should give you an indication of the environments they have worked in, the complexity of the projects they supported and the stakeholders they worked with.

This is particularly important when hiring for transformation roles, where experience in a similar environment can be more valuable than simply having held the same job title.

Assess the Complexity of Their Experience

Not all Business Analysis experience carries the same level of responsibility.

A candidate who has worked on a small internal system change may have useful skills, but their experience may not transfer directly to a major technology transformation.

Consider the scale and complexity of previous projects. What systems or processes were involved? How many teams were affected? Did the candidate work across multiple business functions? Were there competing requirements or difficult stakeholders?

These questions help establish whether someone’s previous experience matches the demands of the vacancy.

Look at What They Actually Delivered

A strong Business Analyst should be able to explain the contribution they made to a project.

Rather than simply saying they “gathered requirements”, candidates should be able to explain what they discovered, how they analysed the problem and what happened as a result.

For example, did their analysis lead to a redesigned process? Did they help define requirements for a new system? Did they identify a problem that changed the direction of a project?

The distinction matters because employers are ultimately hiring people to solve business problems, not simply to complete a list of activities.

Assess Stakeholder Management

Business Analysts often sit between business and technology teams. Their ability to communicate with different stakeholders can therefore be just as important as their technical knowledge.

Candidates may need to gather requirements from senior stakeholders, challenge assumptions, resolve conflicting priorities and explain technical concepts to non-technical colleagues.

During an interview, ask candidates about situations where stakeholders disagreed or where requirements were unclear. Their answers can reveal how they approach difficult conversations and whether they can move a project forward when there is no obvious solution.

Skills England’s 2026 research identifies problem-solving, decision-making, communication, collaboration and adaptability as important capabilities across digital and technology roles.

Test Their Problem-Solving Approach

Business Analysis is not simply about documenting what people tell you.

Good analysts investigate why a problem exists, challenge assumptions and consider different ways of addressing it.

Interview questions should therefore give candidates an opportunity to demonstrate their approach to a problem.

You might ask them to describe a situation where the original requirements were incomplete, contradictory or technically difficult to deliver. Their response can show how they investigate problems, work with stakeholders and reach a practical outcome.

This can be more revealing than asking whether they consider themselves a “good problem solver”.

Understand Their Technical Knowledge

The level of technical knowledge required from a Business Analyst varies considerably.

A role supporting a software implementation may require an understanding of systems, integrations and data. A Business Analyst working on a digital transformation may need to understand how technology affects wider business processes.

That does not mean every Business Analyst needs to be technically specialised.

Instead, employers should define the level of technical understanding the role actually requires before assessing candidates. This prevents businesses from rejecting strong analysts simply because they cannot demonstrate skills that the job does not genuinely need.

Assess Their Requirements Experience

Requirements analysis remains a core part of many Business Analyst roles, but employers should look at how candidates approach requirements rather than simply whether they have experience gathering them.

Strong candidates should be able to explain how they identify requirements, validate them with stakeholders and manage changes throughout a project.

It’s also useful to ask how they deal with requirements that conflict with business objectives, technical constraints or project timelines.

These situations provide a clearer picture of a candidate’s judgement than a list of requirements-management tools on a CV.

Look for Adaptability

Digital transformation projects rarely remain exactly as they were at the beginning.

New information can change requirements. Technology can introduce new possibilities. Business priorities can shift.

A Business Analyst therefore needs to adapt while maintaining a clear understanding of the project’s objectives.

This is becoming increasingly relevant as AI changes technology and business processes. UK Government research published in 2026 shows that employers need different levels of AI capability across their workforces, from people who use existing AI tools to those who implement or develop AI systems.

For employers, the question is not necessarily whether a Business Analyst has used every new AI tool. It is whether they can understand new technology and assess how it could affect the business.

Use the Interview to Validate the CV

A CV should start the assessment, not finish it.

If a candidate claims experience with a major transformation programme, ask them to explain their role in it. What problem was the organisation trying to solve? What did they personally do? Which stakeholders did they work with? What changed because of their analysis?

Strong candidates should be able to explain their experience clearly and consistently.

This approach can also help distinguish between candidates who genuinely owned significant responsibilities and those who worked within a large programme without having direct responsibility for the areas described on their CV.

Define the Right Requirements Before You Recruit

One of the biggest recruitment challenges comes from creating a Business Analyst specification that tries to cover everything.

Requiring experience across multiple industries, methodologies, technologies and transformation environments can dramatically reduce the available candidate pool.

Instead, employers should identify the capabilities that are genuinely essential for the role. From there, they can separate requirements that a candidate must already have from skills that could be developed after joining.

This creates a more realistic candidate profile and makes the recruitment process easier to assess consistently.

What Makes a Strong Business Analysis Hire?

The strongest Business Analyst is not necessarily the candidate with the longest list of qualifications or tools on their CV.

Relevant experience, analytical thinking, stakeholder management, communication and the ability to understand business problems all matter.

For employers, the key is to assess what candidates have actually done, rather than relying on job titles or keyword matches.

A clear understanding of the role, combined with evidence-based interviewing, can make it much easier to identify Business Analysts who have the experience needed to contribute to a transformation programme.

Ultimately, good Business Analysis recruitment starts with a clear question: what problem does this person need to solve, and what evidence shows they can solve it?

Digital transformation roles can be difficult to recruit for because they rarely fit neatly into one skill set. Employers may need someone who understands technology, but they also need someone who can work with stakeholders, manage change and connect technical work to business goals.

That makes a strong digital transformation candidate more than someone with the right technical experience. For hiring teams, the challenge is finding the combination of skills, experience and behaviours that will allow someone to deliver transformation successfully.

What Skills Do Digital Transformation Candidates Need?

Digital transformation candidates need a mix of technical, business and people skills.

The balance depends on the role. A Business Analyst will need different technical knowledge from a Project Manager, while a Transformation Lead will need a broader understanding of strategy, delivery and organisational change.

Technical knowledge still matters, particularly when the role involves technology implementation. However, employers also need people who can understand business requirements, identify problems and work with different teams to find practical solutions.

Skills England’s 2026 research identifies problem-solving, decision-making, learning, digital literacy and adaptability as important capabilities across digital and technology occupations. It also highlights the growing importance of collaboration and communication as AI changes how technology work is performed.

For recruitment teams, this means defining the actual capabilities required for the role rather than simply creating a long list of technical requirements.

Business Understanding Matters

Digital transformation should ultimately support a business objective.

That might mean improving customer experience, reducing costs, replacing outdated systems, increasing efficiency or enabling growth. A candidate who understands the technology but cannot connect it to those objectives may struggle to deliver the expected results.

Strong transformation candidates can explain why a change is needed, not just how to implement it.

This becomes particularly important in senior roles, where transformation leaders often need to work with stakeholders who are focused on commercial and organisational outcomes rather than technical detail.

Stakeholder Management Is a Core Skill

Transformation affects people across an organisation, making stakeholder management an important part of many transformation roles.

A candidate may need to work with technology teams, business leaders, suppliers, customers and employees, often with competing priorities.

Strong candidates can adapt their communication to different audiences. They can explain complex issues clearly, challenge decisions when necessary and build agreement without losing sight of the programme’s objectives.

For hiring managers, these capabilities can be difficult to assess from a CV alone. Interviews should explore how candidates have handled disagreement, competing priorities and difficult stakeholders in previous roles.

Look for Evidence of Change Delivery

Experience with technology does not automatically mean experience with transformation.

Someone may have worked on a system implementation without having responsibility for the wider business change surrounding it. Another candidate may have managed a programme involving new technology, redesigned processes and changes to how employees work.

Those are very different experiences.

When assessing candidates, employers should look for evidence of what changed, what the candidate was responsible for and what happened as a result.

Asking someone to explain a specific transformation they delivered can reveal much more than simply asking whether they have “transformation experience”.

Problem-Solving and Decision-Making

Transformation rarely follows the original plan.

Requirements change. Technology creates unexpected problems. Stakeholders disagree. Projects encounter budget or resource constraints.

Strong candidates can work through these problems without losing sight of the wider objective.

The UK’s Essential Digital Skills Standards reflect the impact of technological change, with the updated standards expanding the digital skills adults need for life and work in response to developments including artificial intelligence.

For employers, this makes it worth exploring how candidates approach unfamiliar problems rather than assessing experience alone.

Adaptability Is Becoming More Important

Technology changes quickly, and digital transformation professionals need to keep learning.

AI makes this even more important. New tools can change processes, create new opportunities and alter the skills required within a team.

A candidate does not necessarily need experience with every new technology. What matters is whether they can understand new technology, assess its relevance and apply it appropriately.

The UK Government’s 2026 research shows that employers need different levels of AI capability across their workforces, from people who use AI tools to those who implement or develop AI systems. This suggests that AI skills requirements extend beyond specialist AI roles.

For employers, learning ability and adaptability can therefore be useful indicators of future potential.

Technical Skills Still Matter

A focus on transferable skills should not mean overlooking technical capability.

Digital transformation candidates still need enough technical understanding to work effectively with technology teams and make informed decisions. The level required will depend on the position.

A Project Manager may not need to write code, but they should understand the technology being implemented well enough to manage dependencies, risks and delivery.

A Business Analyst may need stronger knowledge of systems, data and processes because they will translate business requirements into practical solutions.

A senior technology or transformation leader may need to understand architecture, data, security and emerging technologies at a strategic level.

The key is to assess the technical depth the role actually requires, rather than making every transformation vacancy a search for a technical specialist.

Cultural Fit Should Not Become a Hiring Shortcut

“Cultural fit” often appears in senior recruitment discussions, but employers should be careful about using it too broadly.

Hiring managers may describe a candidate as a “good cultural fit” without clearly explaining what that means. This can create subjective assessments and potentially exclude candidates who bring different perspectives.

It is more useful to assess specific behaviours.

Can the candidate collaborate effectively? Can they challenge senior stakeholders? Can they handle uncertainty? Can they communicate difficult information? Can they work across different functions?

These questions give employers something concrete to assess.

How Should Employers Assess Digital Transformation Candidates?

The strongest recruitment processes focus on evidence.

Rather than asking candidates whether they are good communicators or problem-solvers, ask them to describe situations where they had to use those skills.

A strong interview might explore a transformation that faced resistance, a project where requirements changed or a situation where the candidate had to make a difficult decision with incomplete information.

The answers can reveal how someone actually works rather than how well they can describe themselves.

Employers should also separate essential requirements from desirable experience. Requiring every possible skill can make an already competitive candidate market even smaller.

What Makes a Strong Digital Transformation Candidate?

There is no single profile that defines a successful transformation professional.

The strongest candidates usually combine relevant technical or functional expertise with business understanding, communication, problem-solving and the ability to work through change.

For employers, the most important step is to define those requirements before starting the search. A clear role profile makes it easier to identify suitable candidates, assess experience consistently and avoid filtering out people who could deliver simply because their CV does not match every requirement.

In a changing technology market, the strongest digital transformation candidate is not necessarily the person with the longest list of skills. It is often the person who can connect technology, people and business outcomes while adapting as the transformation evolves.

AI is changing more than the technology businesses use. It is also changing the skills organisations need to deliver digital transformation.

For employers, that doesn’t simply mean hiring more AI specialists. As AI becomes part of software development, data analysis, automation and business processes, transformation teams also need people who can understand its impact on workflows, employees and business decisions.

Skills England’s 2026 research shows that AI is reshaping digital and technology roles, with demand shifting from some routine coding and testing towards oversight, assurance, judgement and communication. It also highlights growing demand for adaptability, accountability and collaboration alongside technical expertise.

How is AI changing digital transformation?

Digital transformation has traditionally involved introducing new systems, replacing legacy technology and improving business processes. AI adds another layer because it can change how the work itself gets done.

A business might use AI to analyse data, automate processes, support customers or help employees make decisions. Each use case can change the skills required within the transformation team.

CIPD research published in 2026 highlights how AI is changing tasks, roles and skill requirements, with organisations needing to adapt skills planning as AI adoption develops rather than relying on one-off training.

For hiring teams, this means looking beyond the technology being implemented and considering the people needed to manage and support that change.

Do digital transformation teams still need technical skills?

Yes. AI does not remove the need for technical expertise.

Technology professionals still need knowledge of systems, software, data, infrastructure, security and architecture. In many cases, they also need to understand how AI fits into those environments.

The difference is that technical knowledge may no longer be enough on its own. A technology professional working on an AI-enabled transformation may also need to assess outputs, identify risks and understand when human judgement should remain part of a process.

Which skills are becoming more important?

AI is increasing the value of skills that connect technology with the wider business.

Problem-solving and decision-making remain important because AI can generate information and recommendations, but people still need to decide what to do with them.

Communication and collaboration matter because technology professionals increasingly need to explain AI-enabled systems to technical and non-technical stakeholders.

Adaptability is also becoming more important as tools and workflows continue to change.

Judgement and accountability matter when AI influences business decisions. Someone still needs to understand when an AI output should be checked, challenged or rejected.

The UK Government’s 2026 AI Labour Market Survey highlights changing skills requirements and significant skills gaps across the UK’s AI labour market, reinforcing the need for employers to consider both specialist expertise and broader capabilities when hiring for AI-enabled transformation.

Will employers need more AI specialists?

Some organisations will. Others may not.

A business developing AI products will need a different skills mix from one using AI to improve internal processes. Specialist roles may include AI engineers, machine learning professionals, data specialists and people working in AI governance or assurance.

However, existing transformation roles are changing too.

A Business Analyst may need to understand how AI affects a business process. A Project Manager may need to manage AI-related risks and dependencies. A Change Manager may need to help employees adapt to AI-enabled ways of working.

The technology may sit with specialists, but its impact can extend across the whole transformation programme.

Should employers hire for AI experience or potential?

There will be roles where direct AI experience is essential. Someone building or managing an AI system may need proven specialist expertise.

For other transformation roles, employers may benefit from looking more broadly. A candidate with strong technology knowledge, business understanding and experience delivering change may be able to develop their AI capability quickly.

The 2026 Skills for AI research from DWP and Skills England highlights the need for employers to assess their AI skills requirements and plan workforce development as AI adoption progresses, rather than treating skills gaps as a one-off problem.

That makes it important to define what the person actually needs to deliver before deciding which AI skills are essential.

What does this mean for digital transformation recruitment?

Job descriptions may need to change as AI becomes part of more transformation programmes.

Adding “AI experience” to every technology vacancy will not necessarily solve the problem. Employers first need to understand the role, the technology involved and the outcomes they expect.

From there, hiring teams can identify which skills are essential and which could be developed after hiring. This can also help them decide whether a gap requires a permanent hire, internal development or temporary specialist support.

Building an AI-ready transformation team

The strongest digital transformation teams will not necessarily contain the most AI specialists. They will contain the right mix of technical expertise, business understanding and people who can adapt as the technology changes.

For employers, the key question is therefore not simply “Who has AI experience?”

It is “What will our transformation team need to achieve as AI changes the way we work?”

That question can lead to more realistic job descriptions, better hiring decisions and a clearer approach to building the skills needed for digital transformation.

Cybersecurity is often treated as an IT responsibility until an organisation reaches the point where the risks become too complex for a generalist team to manage alone.

For small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), deciding when to make that first specialist cybersecurity hire can be difficult. Hiring too early may create unnecessary overhead. Waiting too long can leave an organisation exposed to risks it does not have the expertise or capacity to manage.

This is particularly relevant in the UK where, according to this UK Government 2025/2026 survey, 46% of small businesses and 65% of medium-sized businesses reported experiencing a cyber breach or attack in the previous 12 months.

The right point depends less on the size of the business than on its technology environment, regulatory obligations, data, customers and exposure to cyber threats.

For many SMEs, the question is therefore not whether cybersecurity matters, but when dedicated expertise becomes necessary.

When Generalist IT Stops Being Enough

Generalist IT teams are often well placed to manage cybersecurity basics. They can maintain systems, manage access, apply patches, monitor infrastructure and respond to routine issues.

As an organisation grows, however, security becomes harder to manage alongside everything else.

UK Government research shows that 49% of businesses have a basic cyber security skills gap, while 30% have gaps in more advanced areas such as digital forensics and penetration testing.

Cloud environments introduce new configuration and identity risks. Remote working expands the attack surface. Customer and employee data require greater protection. Third-party suppliers create additional dependencies, while new regulations and customer security requirements can increase the organisation’s responsibilities.

At this point, cybersecurity can become a specialist discipline rather than another responsibility for the IT team.

The challenge is recognising when that point has been reached.

The Warning Signs

There is no universal employee or revenue threshold at which an SME needs its first cybersecurity specialist. Instead, several indicators can suggest that existing capability is no longer sufficient.

One is increasing complexity. Businesses operating across multiple cloud platforms, applications, locations or third-party services have more systems and connections to secure.

Another is the sensitivity of the information being handled. Organisations holding financial information, personal data, intellectual property or commercially sensitive customer information face greater consequences if that data is compromised.

Regulatory and contractual requirements can also change the equation. An organisation may need to demonstrate specific security controls to customers, regulators or larger corporate partners.

Finally, repeated security incidents, unresolved vulnerabilities or an IT team that is consistently too busy to address security properly are clear warning signs.

Cybersecurity Is Not Just an IT Problem

One of the biggest changes as an organisation grows is that cybersecurity moves beyond technology.

Security decisions increasingly affect operations, finance, legal requirements, suppliers and business continuity. A serious incident can prevent employees from working, disrupt customers and damage an organisation’s reputation.

This means security leadership needs to understand the business as well as the technology.

The National Cyber Security Centre advises boards and directors that cyber security risks require board-level attention and that leaders need to understand cyber governance well enough to evaluate preparedness and ensure security aligns with business objectives.

A cybersecurity specialist should be able to identify technical risks, explain their business implications and help decision-makers prioritise what needs to be addressed.

For an SME, this can be more valuable than simply adding another technical resource.

What Should the First Hire Look Like?

The first cybersecurity hire should reflect the organisation’s actual risk profile, rather than simply being the most senior security role the business can afford.

A business with a relatively straightforward environment may benefit from a Cybersecurity Analyst or Security Engineer who can strengthen monitoring, vulnerability management, identity and security controls.

A larger or more complex organisation may need a Security Manager or Head of Cybersecurity who can establish strategy, governance, policies and risk management alongside technical oversight.

Some businesses may not yet need a permanent senior security leader. An interim specialist or external security partner can help establish the required foundations before the organisation decides what permanent capability it needs.

The important point is not to hire the most senior security professional available.

It is to hire the capability the organisation actually needs.

Don’t Hire for a Job Title

Cybersecurity roles can overlap considerably.

An organisation might advertise for a Security Engineer when it actually needs someone to establish a security programme. Another might search for a Head of Cybersecurity when the immediate requirement is hands-on technical capability.

This distinction matters particularly for SMEs, where every senior hire needs to solve a clearly defined business problem.

Before opening a vacancy, organisations should establish what they expect the person to achieve.

Do they need stronger technical controls? Better security governance? Regulatory compliance? Incident response capability? Security awareness? A long-term cybersecurity strategy?

The answers will determine the appropriate level and type of hire.

Build the Capability Before the Crisis

Cybersecurity recruitment becomes considerably harder when an organisation waits until it has experienced a serious incident.

At that point, the business is often competing for talent while dealing with an immediate operational problem. The role may be poorly defined, expectations may be unrealistic and the organisation may struggle to assess candidates because it lacks internal security expertise.

Planning earlier allows businesses to take a more measured approach.

Not every SME needs to build a dedicated cybersecurity function immediately. The NCSC recognises that smaller organisations may have limited in-house expertise and provides its Cyber Advisor scheme specifically to help them identify security gaps and implement appropriate controls. This suggests that external expertise can be a practical option while an organisation assesses whether it has a long-term need for dedicated internal capability.

A specialist can assess the existing environment, identify capability gaps and help determine which responsibilities should sit internally and which can be supported externally.

This also gives the organisation time to build security maturity before it becomes an urgent business problem.

The Recruitment Challenge

Cybersecurity remains a specialist skills market, even as overall hiring has cooled. The UK’s latest cyber security labour-market research estimates an annual workforce gap of around 3,800 professionals. At the same time, 63% of core cyber security vacancies required candidates with two to six years of experience, highlighting the challenge of finding professionals with the right level of practical expertise.

Organisations are therefore not simply competing with other SMEs for experienced professionals; they are competing with larger businesses that can often offer higher salaries, established security teams and more specialised career paths.

That makes defining the role particularly important.

A strong candidate may be interested in an SME because they can have a meaningful influence on the organisation’s security strategy. However, they need to understand the scope of the role, the resources available and the level of leadership support they will receive.

A poorly defined position can therefore make recruitment harder, even when the organisation has a genuine need.

Specialist recruitment advice can help businesses benchmark the market, assess realistic requirements and identify whether permanent, interim or specialist contract expertise is most appropriate.

A Practical Decision

For SMEs, the decision to hire a cybersecurity specialist should ultimately come down to risk and complexity rather than headcount alone.

If cybersecurity is already consuming significant IT capacity, important risks are going unmanaged, customers are demanding stronger security controls or the technology environment has become too complex for generalist oversight, dedicated expertise may be justified.

The first hire does not necessarily need to build a large security function.

It needs to establish the capability the business currently lacks and provide a foundation for future growth.

Conclusion

There is no universal point at which an SME needs its first cybersecurity specialist.

The decision should be based on the organisation’s risk, complexity and existing capability. When security responsibilities are stretching a generalist IT team, important risks are going unmanaged or customers and regulators are demanding stronger controls, dedicated expertise may be justified.

The answer is not necessarily a senior permanent hire. Depending on the organisation’s needs, the right solution could be a technical specialist, security manager, interim professional or external support.

What matters is understanding the capability gap before deciding how to fill it.

For growing businesses, cybersecurity should develop alongside the organisation rather than becoming a priority only after an incident.

Key Takeaways

Cybersecurity is a business responsibility, not just an IT responsibility. Senior leaders need enough understanding of cyber risk to make informed decisions about investment, resilience and organisational capability

Size alone should not determine when an SME hires a cybersecurity specialist. Risk, technology complexity and regulatory or customer requirements are more useful indicators.

Generalist IT teams can reach a capacity limit. Growing cloud environments, third-party systems, sensitive data and increasing security requirements can create a need for dedicated expertise.

The first hire should solve a specific capability gap. That might mean technical security, governance, incident response or broader security leadership.

The most senior role is not necessarily the right role. Organisations should define the problem before deciding whether they need an analyst, engineer, manager or security leader.

Permanent recruitment is not the only option. Interim or external expertise can be appropriate where the requirement is temporary or the organisation is still establishing its security function.

Early planning reduces recruitment risk. Defining the capability before a security problem becomes urgent gives businesses more time to assess their options and find the right expertise.

Hiring a senior technology leader is a major decision. A CTO, CIO and Head of IT can all lead technology teams, but their responsibilities can be very different depending on the organisation.

The right appointment depends less on the job title and more on what the business needs technology to achieve. Is the priority growth and innovation? Digital transformation? Technology operations? Cyber security? Or does the organisation need someone to bring several of these areas together?

For hiring teams, understanding that difference can make it easier to define the role, set the right level of seniority and find the right candidate.

What Is the Difference Between a CTO, CIO and Head of IT?

The responsibilities of these roles often overlap, particularly in smaller organisations. However, they usually have different areas of focus.

A Chief Technology Officer (CTO) typically focuses on technology strategy, innovation and the technology that supports products, services or business growth. A CTO may lead decisions around architecture, software development, emerging technology and how technology can create a competitive advantage.

A Chief Information Officer (CIO) usually has a broader focus on how technology supports the whole organisation. This can include business systems, data, digital transformation, technology operations and strategic planning. The role often sits closely with other business leaders because technology decisions affect how the organisation operates.

A Head of IT tends to have a stronger focus on the day-to-day technology environment. This can include infrastructure, IT support, systems, suppliers, security and service delivery.

There is no universal definition for these titles. Organisations can use them differently, which is why the responsibilities of the role matter more than the title when starting a recruitment process.

The UK Government’s Digital and Data Profession Capability Framework highlights the broad responsibilities of senior technology leaders, including technology strategy, innovation, organisational capability and strategic decision-making.

When Does a Business Need a CTO?

A CTO can make sense when technology sits at the centre of the organisation’s growth or product strategy.

This is particularly relevant for technology companies and businesses developing digital products or services. The role may need to lead technical direction, product development, architecture and innovation while making sure technology decisions support commercial goals.

A business preparing for rapid growth may also need a CTO to establish the technology strategy and build the technical capability required to support it.

The important question is not simply whether the business needs a senior technology person. It is whether technology itself is a major part of the organisation’s growth strategy.

When Does a Business Need a CIO?

A CIO may be more appropriate when the main challenge involves how technology supports the organisation as a whole.

This could include large-scale digital transformation, replacing legacy systems, improving business processes, managing data or bringing different technology functions together.

A CIO also needs to work comfortably outside the technology department. The role may involve working with finance, operations, HR, commercial teams and the board to make sure technology investment supports wider business objectives.

The UK Government’s 2026 Government Functional Standard: Digital highlights the role of senior digital leadership in aligning digital, data and technology with organisational objectives and wider business strategy.

That makes business understanding particularly important when hiring for a CIO role.

When Is a Head of IT the Better Choice?

Not every organisation needs a C-suite technology leader.

A Head of IT may be the better choice when the business already has a clear technology strategy but needs stronger operational leadership.

The role could involve managing IT support, infrastructure, cloud services, suppliers, systems and security. It may also focus on improving service quality, controlling technology costs and making sure employees have the systems they need to work effectively.

Hiring a CIO or CTO when the actual requirement is operational IT leadership can create an unnecessary level of complexity.

The opposite can also cause problems. Hiring a Head of IT when the business needs someone to lead a major transformation may leave the organisation without the strategic leadership it needs.

What Should You Look for in a Senior Technology Leader?

The technical requirements will depend on the role, but senior technology hiring should not focus only on technical expertise.

Skills England’s 2026 research shows that technology roles require strong problem-solving and decision-making skills alongside technical capability. As AI changes how technology work is done, employers are also placing greater importance on judgement, communication, adaptability, accountability and collaboration.

For senior roles, those wider skills become particularly important.

A technology leader needs to explain complex issues clearly, make decisions when there is uncertainty and build trust with people who may not have a technical background.

They also need to understand the commercial side of technology. A strong technical decision is not necessarily the right business decision if it does not support the organisation’s goals.

How Important Is Business and Commercial Experience?

For senior technology roles, technical knowledge alone is rarely enough.

A CTO, CIO or Head of IT needs to understand why the organisation is investing in technology and what it expects that investment to achieve.

That could mean improving customer experience, reducing costs, supporting growth, managing risk or enabling a major change programme.

The candidate therefore needs to connect technology decisions to business outcomes.

This is particularly important as AI adoption increases. The UK Government’s 2026 AI Adoption Plan for the Digital and Technologies sector identifies data, skills, governance and culture as fundamental to successful AI adoption.

A senior technology leader may therefore need to do more than introduce new technology. They may need to help the wider organisation understand how to use it effectively.

Should You Hire From Within or Look Externally?

There is no single answer.

An internal candidate may already understand the organisation, its systems and its culture. They may also have strong relationships with senior stakeholders and existing teams.

However, an external hire can bring experience from different organisations, new ideas or skills that the business does not currently have.

The decision should depend on the gap the organisation needs to fill.

If the business needs someone to improve an existing technology function, an internal promotion may work well. If it needs a major change in strategy, new capabilities or a different approach to technology, an external appointment may offer more value.

How Should You Define the Role Before Recruiting?

One of the biggest risks in senior technology recruitment is creating a role that tries to cover too much.

A business may want one person to lead IT operations, digital transformation, cyber security, data, AI, architecture and technology strategy.

That can make the role difficult to recruit for because the organisation may effectively be looking for several different leaders.

Before starting the search, hiring teams should agree what the person will actually own, who they will report to, what decisions they can make and what the business expects them to achieve.

The salary and seniority should then reflect those responsibilities.

How Should Employers Approach Senior Technology Recruitment?

The most effective starting point is the business problem rather than the job title.

Before advertising a CTO, CIO or Head of IT position, employers should understand what they want the person to change, build or improve.

That should shape the role’s responsibilities, seniority, salary and candidate profile.

It can also help employers decide whether they need a permanent senior appointment at all. In some situations, an interim leader or specialist contractor may be appropriate while the organisation defines its longer-term structure.

The strongest hiring decisions start with the same question:

What does the business actually need technology to achieve?

Once that is clear, it becomes much easier to define the right role, set realistic expectations and identify the type of technology leader who can deliver it.

After almost four years of falling permanent recruitment, the UK hiring market may finally be starting to recover. In July 2026, permanent placements stabilised after 45 consecutive months of decline, according to the KPMG and REC Report on Jobs. Temporary recruitment also improved, with temporary billings increasing for the fourth month in a row.

That does not mean the recruitment market has returned to how it was before. Employers are still cautious, while the skills they need continue to change.

For technology and transformation teams, this creates a different hiring challenge. Businesses are increasingly starting with a skills gap, project or business problem and then deciding what type of resource they need.

Is UK Permanent Recruitment Finally Recovering?

July’s figures are significant because they ended the longest period of falling permanent recruitment recorded by the Report on Jobs. The permanent placements index reached 50.0, marking the point between growth and decline.

The result should still be treated carefully. Permanent vacancies continued to fall, although at their slowest rate for almost two years. Employers also remain cautious about making long-term hiring decisions.

Temporary recruitment has been more positive. Temporary billings increased for a fourth consecutive month, while temporary vacancies increased for the first time in two years.

This suggests some businesses are increasing workforce capacity while still using flexible options where they are not ready to make permanent commitments.

What Does the UK Recruitment Recovery Mean for Employers?

A recovery in recruitment does not mean employers will simply start hiring in the same way they did before the downturn.

Many businesses have spent several years controlling costs, delaying projects and asking existing employees to take on more work. As activity increases, those approaches may become harder to maintain.

A technology team may need additional skills for a transformation project. A business may discover that it lacks expertise in data, cyber security or cloud. Another organisation may need project leadership but be unsure whether it needs a permanent Project Manager or temporary support.

These are not just recruitment questions. They are resourcing questions.

The right answer could be a permanent employee, a contractor, internal development or a combination of approaches.

Why Recruitment Is Becoming More About Resourcing Strategy

Recruitment often starts with a job title. A business decides it needs a Project Manager, Business Analyst, Software Engineer or IT Manager and then looks for someone who matches the job description.

That approach does not always work for complex technology and transformation projects.

The better starting point is the problem the business needs to solve. What skills are missing? How long will they be needed? Does the business need permanent capability or specialist support for a specific project?

A permanent employee may make sense when the organisation needs long-term expertise. A contractor may be better for a project with a clear end date. Internal development may work when existing employees already have some of the required skills.

Understanding the requirement first can also identify problems with a job description before the vacancy reaches the market.

Why Candidate Availability Does Not Mean Every Skill Is Easy to Find

There may be more candidates available in parts of the UK labour market, but that does not mean employers can easily find every skill they need.

Skills England’s 2026 Annual Skills Report highlights ongoing skills shortages across the UK, with employers reporting that more than a quarter of vacancies are hard to fill because of skills shortages.

This matters for technology recruitment. An employer may receive many applications for a technology vacancy while still struggling to find someone with the right technical experience, seniority and business knowledge.

The size of the candidate pool is therefore only part of the picture. Employers also need to understand whether the specific skills they need are available.

Could the Recruitment Downturn Have Hidden Skills Shortages?

A long period of lower hiring can make skills shortages harder to see.

When businesses delay projects and reduce recruitment, demand for some skills falls. This can make the market appear well supplied even when there are not enough experienced workers coming through.

As demand increases, those shortages can become clearer.

Technology faces its own challenge. The digital and technologies sector is expected to need significant additional workers over the next decade, while many priority occupations already face high demand.

For employers, waiting until a project starts before looking for specialist skills could therefore create problems.

What Does the Recovery Mean for Technology Recruitment?

Technology hiring could become more competitive as businesses increase investment in digital projects.

The skills required are also changing. AI is affecting how technology teams work and what employers expect from technology professionals.

Technical knowledge remains important, but organisations may also need people who can solve problems, communicate clearly, work with stakeholders and understand how technology affects the wider business.

Are Technology Skills Becoming Harder to Hire?

The UK is likely to need more technology professionals over the next decade.

The UK Institute for Technical Skills & Strategy’s 2026 research estimates that up to 120,000 additional technical professionals may be needed by 2035 to support growth in the UK’s Digital and Technologies sector. It also identifies persistent skills shortages in areas including AI and cyber security.

This does not mean every technology role will become difficult to fill. It does mean employers should not assume that a large candidate pool will make specialist recruitment easy.

The problem becomes greater when one role asks for several difficult-to-find skills. A senior technology position requiring specialist technical knowledge, leadership experience and industry expertise may have a much smaller candidate pool than the job title suggests.

Are Employers Paying Enough for the Skills They Need?

Salary is another important part of recruitment.

The July Report on Jobs found that permanent starting salary growth reached a six-month high, with employers increasing salaries in some areas to attract people with the skills and experience they needed.

This does not mean every employer needs to increase salaries. It does mean hiring teams should check that the salary matches the actual requirements of the role.

Adding more responsibilities without reviewing salary and seniority can make a vacancy harder to fill.

Should You Hire One Person or Build a Team?

Not every skills gap can be solved with one new hire.

A business might ask for a senior technology professional who can manage architecture, project delivery, business change and stakeholders. In reality, these may be several different areas of expertise.

Trying to put everything into one role can reduce the number of suitable candidates and increase salary expectations.

A different approach may work better. One permanent employee could provide leadership while contractors provide specialist skills for a specific project. An existing employee could also develop their skills while the business recruits externally for a particular gap.

Why Workforce Planning Matters as Hiring Demand Recovers

Workforce planning becomes more important when an organisation expects its skills needs to change.

Technology teams often need different skills at different stages of a project. A business introducing AI may need technical specialists as well as people who understand data, governance and change. A major transformation may also require different skills during planning and implementation.

The CIPD’s 2026 Labour Market Outlook recommends taking a strategic approach to workforce planning, including using flexible resourcing to help avoid future skills gaps.

This allows employers to consider which skills they already have, which they can develop and which they will need to recruit.

What Should Employers Do as the UK Recruitment Market Recovers?

The stabilisation of permanent recruitment is positive, but employers should not assume hiring will simply return to the way it worked before.

The market has changed. Technology has changed. Skills requirements have changed. Some shortages have also become more visible.

For hiring teams, the priority should be understanding what capability the business actually needs.

That means looking at the problem, identifying the required skills and checking whether those skills are available in the market. Employers should also consider whether they need permanent employees, contractors, internal development or a combination of approaches.

What Comes Next for UK Recruitment?

The July figures do not guarantee a strong or lasting recovery. Economic conditions, employment costs, government policy and global events could all affect hiring decisions.

The stabilisation of permanent placements is still important after 45 months of decline. Temporary recruitment has also improved, suggesting some businesses are beginning to increase workforce capacity.

For technology and transformation employers, the next step will be deciding how to build that capacity.

Some businesses will need permanent employees. Others will need contractors or specialist project support. Many will need a combination of recruitment, flexible resourcing and internal development.

The main change is that recruitment increasingly starts before the vacancy. It starts with understanding the business problem, assessing the skills available and deciding what type of resource will provide the right solution.

The UK recruitment market may be moving towards greater stability, but the next phase is unlikely to look exactly like the last one. Employers that understand what skills they need and plan their resourcing early will be better prepared as hiring demand increases.