AI Career Intelligence System
An AI-assisted research and decision framework for evaluating emerging AI roles against defined, weighted criteria.
Career Intelligence /
Evaluation Matrix
- Remote-work potential
- Accessibility
- Technical requirements
- Creative / research fit
- Portfolio evidence
- Professional viability
Context
A structured research project examining the emerging AI job landscape and testing it against a defined set of evaluation criteria rather than impressions.
Question / Challenge
Which emerging AI roles are genuinely viable for a specific practitioner profile, and on what evidence?
My role
Sole researcher and system designer: criteria design, source gathering, verification, comparison and written conclusions.
Process
- Define the evaluation criteria: remote-work potential, accessibility, technical requirements, creative and research fit, portfolio evidence and professional viability.
- Gather role descriptions and market material across the AI-only role families under investigation.
- Use AI assistance to summarise, cluster and structure the material.
- Verify claims against primary sources and discard unsupported or promotional material.
- Compare roles against the criteria and record the reasoning behind each judgement.
AI contribution
AI was used for summarising volume, clustering role families and structuring comparisons — not for the conclusions.
Human judgement
Criteria design, weighting, source verification and the final assessments. Where AI summaries flattened distinctions between roles, they were rewritten.
- Research question
- Criteria and weighting
- Source verification
- Selection
- Final decision
- Summarisation
- Clustering
- Structuring
- Drafting
Output
A comparison framework covering junior and associate AI engineering, generative-AI workflow design, AI automation, creative AI technology, AI research analysis and responsible-AI support, with documented reasoning.
AI disclosure
- To compress a large, repetitive body of role descriptions into comparable structures quickly.
- Role definitions, stated requirements and working patterns were checked against primary listings and published material.
- Conflated adjacent role families, and reproduced promotional framing from job-market content as if factual.
- Any summary presenting market speculation as established fact; all salary or demand claims without a traceable source.
- The criteria, the weighting, the verification and every conclusion.
- Accessibility appears as one evaluation criterion among several, treated as a design constraint rather than a narrative.
Reflection
The value sits in the criteria, not the answer: an explicit, weighted framework makes a decision reviewable by someone else.