The Reality of Hiring for the AI Age: The New Manufacturing Workers

People are starting to recognize that this isn't actually taking jobs per se. It's shifting the jobs. And so as you find five years from now, people literally working right alongside of digital coworkers doing work with them, then they'll be more eased at what's available for people to do beyond that as well.

People B4 Machines. Conversations on the chaos of factory automation from Monday morning to the very near future.

Welcome to People B4 Machines, conversations on the chaos of factory automation from Monday morning to the very near future. I'm Amanda Cupido, a speaker, author, and entrepreneur with a passion for the intersection of technology and humanity. In this episode, we're discussing how leaders are hiring people in this new AI world. Talent recruitment has always been a quickly evolving industry, but now it has been taken to a whole new level. Here to discuss the latest tips and tricks is Greg Summers. Greg is the CEO of Orion Talent, which helps organizations attract, hire, develop, and retain the technical workforce required to compete in today's market. He has over 30 years of experience in talent acquisition and talent management solutions. He works closely with companies in manufacturing, energy, life sciences, and digital infrastructure to address some of their most pressing workforce and talent challenges. Prior to Orion Talent, Greg held regional and global executive leadership roles at Cielo and Randstad. Welcome, Greg.

Thank you, Amanda. It's really great to be with you.

It's great to have you. So when it comes to hiring in this new AI age that I mentioned in the intro there, there's this misconception that in manufacturing specifically, we're hiring software engineers to run the floor. And that's not necessarily the case. But I want to ask you, what does the modern manufacturing worker actually look like?

Yeah, that's neat. It's um so first of all, thank you again for having me for this conversation. It's it's actually interesting because modern manufacturing is very different than the preconceived notions people may have had about it in the past. It is not as labor intensive as it was. It is actually more of a technical job than it is a physical job. And that isn't a complete sort of transformation. It's moving in that direction. But I think the real key differentiation between what we had and what we have now is a move toward a more technical job. So if you're on the floor of a manufacturing facility right now, what you may find is you're working alongside of robots or you're working with machines that are AI enabled that are helping you to perform the same functions that you might have done physically yourself before, but with the right support and the right adaptation to the tools, you can do in a more compliant, in a more rapid and certainly a more succinct way than you might have done in the past.

And so, I mean, there's a lot of benefits to that in addition to what you just mentioned, but also speaking about the physical burnout that folks might have been experiencing in the past. Now with this shift, obviously we might not be coming to those burnout levels. Is this changing the trajectory of people's careers in this space because of that?

Yeah, absolutely. I mean, I actually see it benefiting the workforce holistically. So if you think about two sort of cohorts that are in the workforce right now, you have those early career people who are stepping into the workforce that can leverage some of the instruction and guidance they can get using AI tools now to get them up to speed faster on the job. Where I actually think it's going to benefit manufacturing more specifically. And if I think about here in the US, studies say that by 2030, there'll be 2.1 million open jobs in the manufacturing space. And a lot of that is due to the fact that we've got people on the retirement space rolling out. Some of them may be individuals that can extend their career with the right type of support through the tools that they might be using. And I'll give you a practical example. We do a lot of work in both the physical and the technical spaces in manufacturing. And so if you've got someone who's been, say, on the floor welding overhead for 20 years, that's a real physical toll and a burden. With the right type of support through robotics, you actually have an opportunity now for someone to extend their career, manage and program robots who are doing the basic welding they might have done before, where they can redeploy their skills to actually managing some of the defects and maybe spot checking or doing some more specific or customized welds that might be on the docket for the day. So I definitely think this can extend careers for people who have the experience that have been in a workforce for a while and frankly may not want to retire, but could be physically burnt out or mentally burnt out from the job.

And I know you work a lot with professional development. And so you're talking about this shift in duties. How do you suggest leaders support these workers that might need to make that slight shift, but do need some extra training or upskilling?

Yeah, well, this is interesting because I was listening to some of your other podcasts. One of the ones that I listened to was talking about introducing robotics, introducing humanoids into the workforce. And I found it fairly interesting because it resonated with me because I know as a leader of an organization that's also in our space adopting AI rapidly, it starts with leadership. And so what that means specifically is as a leader, I need to be proficient with the tools that are effective for me in my job so that I can model that for others. And then second to that would be providing the team with the access and the time to be able to use the tools that will help them be effective in their job. So you have to model the behavior. You have to walk the walk, but you also have to provide the access to tools and the space for people to learn at their pace to ensure that they know that this is a direction that we're going in.

And I know there's a lot of fear-mongering around all of this. So are there any tips you have in helping to combat that?

Yeah, I do. I mean, and I think I've spent 30 years really truly at the cross-section of town acquisition and technology. And so over the course of my career, I've seen a number of different evolutions of the way we do the work that we do. And with each evolution, I think people have to adapt to what happens. But whether it be in our space or in manufacturing more broadly, I've always advised people to be curious and to be creative because the truth is the more curious you are about changes that are coming, the more proficient you will be as they come along, and the more self-sufficient you'll be as well. So that's my general guidance to people as they're stepping into the space and trying to use the technologies or understanding how it will impact their job is it doesn't help to sit in your place because things will continue to move forward. So the most effective thing you can do is to be curious. Not saying accept everything. I'm just saying be curious and understand a little bit more about it for yourself. Do a little bit of self-study. And hopefully you're with an organization that will help provide the resources for you to come along as well.

Now you're uniquely positioned because you're working with multiple companies in the manufacturing sector. So I think you get to see a lot. And I'm curious if there are any best practices that you've seen emerging when it comes to seeing how companies are using AI to augment roles on the plant floor.

Yeah, it's neat. I try to get on factory floors, manufacturing floors as much as possible because it's been a passion of mine. I always tell people I was a failed engineer, I actually moved from engineering to economics because I wasn't exactly sure what I'd do. But what's interesting as I look at what's happening right now on the manufacturing floors is if these were the types of jobs that were available to me 30 years ago, I probably would have stayed in the field. But what I see right now is organizations actually doing a lot to help develop individuals that are coming into the space. And so specifically, I'll give you an example. I was on the floor of a photonics organization a couple of weeks ago where they were showing me uh systems that right now do the visualization and testing of the equipment that they work with. And that saves new people coming into the business time from understanding how to visually identify defects on their own. The machine helps them do that. But as they learn how to use the machine, they come up to speed faster than they otherwise would have. And that's just one example of how organizations are recognizing that where there's a skills gap and where there's a talent gap in terms of the qualified and able to do the work, this type of technology can actually help accelerate and close that gap for them. And we've seen other examples across factory floors of the organizations that we work with as well, too, whether it's semiconductor or the data and digital center space as well.

Neat. And I love the specifics of the examples. So thanks. I find it really helpful. I want to switch gears and talk about resumes. And I know this is a hot topic that I'm sure you get asked about all the time because of your role. Um, but I do think it and talking about it helps on both sides, right? It helps for the people who are hiring and the people who are applying. So when filling positions in AI integrated factories, what would you say people should be trying to incorporate into their resumes when they're applying? And what should leaders be looking for?

Yeah, that's interesting. I'd always joke about getting a t-shirt that has a big red circle with a cross through it that says resume, just because I've been one of those people who's been looking to get rid of it probably for the last 10 years, but I'm not the only one. I know everyone knows that it's a flawed process. Yeah. Resumes tell you what somebody did. It doesn't actually tell you whether they're qualified to do what you need them to do. And in this environment now, with everything that's changing, it makes it that much more complicated because you truly do need to now assess for competency, capability, and intuition. As I mentioned earlier, curiosity is a really key component now that you're looking for in people. So I would advise anyone who's putting a resume together to make sure you're clear and sharing some examples of how you've been able to learn something without naming this. How you stepped into a spot where you expected to take on a responsibility with limited direction and guidance. Those are the types of things that employers need to be looking for now to ensure that when someone steps into an environment that might actually be different 60 days, 90 days a year from now, that you've got somebody that you're looking at that's able to adapt. And from the employer's perspective, I would highly advise you to make sure, regardless of the type of role, that you're actually getting training, people who will be interviewing those candidates for those types of competencies and asking those types of questions that are very specific. And I'm not sure that the example itself matters as much as your ability to assess their process, their ability to move through gathering information to help make decisions with limited information available to them at the time.

So is there an example of a question that someone who's conducting the interview could ask to help bring that forward?

Yeah. I mean, I a perfect example. And I think it could be work, it could be personal. I try to key in on people who actually read, you know, people who are are willing to sort of be patient, take the time. I think it might be a lost start these days, but people who are patient and will take the time to try and explore and learn something for yourself. So a good example of a question that I might ask would be: can you give me an example of a situation where you stepped into solving a problem that required you to do external research, either on the internet or in connecting with colleagues or friends? How did you go about doing it? Who did you reach out to? How did you assess what was qualified information or not? And what was the conclusion? So, you know, I always ask questions in fives. I'm not sure you need to ask all five of those questions, but hopefully you get the gist of like the process that you're hoping to assess out of someone as they're thinking through learning. And that's really what we're trying to do is how well do people learn? Because that's what we really need them to do.

I love that example. And I'm and I also picked up on this questions and fives, which is very fascinating. And so that means you're just digging deeper and deeper on like an overarching question and you're going five layers deep. Is that essentially it?

Yeah, I find people would rather me ask five in a row than continue to dig in because it's less frustrating for them. So yeah, I'd like to make sure they understand the essence of where we're going with this question and hopefully in framing it that way, they understand what I'm asking is not necessarily for the answer, but for the process. How do they go about it? Because that's really what's most important. When you leave somebody on alone on a factory floor with machines, they may not have someone right there for them to support them in that moment. And they need to be curious, they need to be creative, and to a certain degree, they need to be brave to take action where needed. But the way you do that successfully is again by uh doing your own personal research and and seeking support to help answer the questions that you need answered.

Fascinating approach. And I also think that's you role modeling curiosity. So really nice way to play that out in an interview. Thanks.

Yeah. Certainly my colleagues at work will tell you it's maybe not the best thing all the time, but but yeah, I think that's that is me, and I think that sort of helps me process personally.

Nice. All right. I was looking on your LinkedIn, and I I want to read back to you actually part of your post that really stood out to me recently where you were talking about using AI from the HR perspective, saying AI can make hiring faster, but that doesn't automatically make it better. Long-term hiring outcomes are dependent on trust, transparency, and a strong candidate experience. I mean, we're talking about all these soft skills. I feel this ties right in. Why do you why don't you speak more to that?

Yeah, sure. You might imagine we've done what we needed to organizationally to invest in artificial intelligence and through partnerships with organizations, through our own development, we have uh Juliet, our agent, that actually helps us do initial screening and engagement with candidates that we work with. I think it's critically important because it gives us the opportunity to have Juliet engage and greet every single person that comes to our website for a job. But her primary responsibility is to understand experience, understand interest, understand availability, so that when she passes the individual over to a recruiter, they actually have an ability to spend the majority of their time understanding what that individual is really looking for and assessing what's best for them with them. And that's not something truly at this point, Juliet can do. So I just share that as an example of distinction between how we're using agents and how we're using our own team to engage with people. And I think that's important because the true differentiation and distinction at this point truly is that most people need to understand if I'm going to make a change in my career, I want to be able to talk it through with someone who has a deep understanding of what that environment's like, what the culture's like, what the team is like. And I'm certain that the person on the other side of the phone would be better served and equipped to be able to do that than today, at least, many agents are able to do to help support them through that process. And I think that's very important.

And this ties right back into the manufacturing industry specifically, since we've been battling a massive skills gap and an aging workforce. And so right now there's this push to attract younger, more diverse talent. And so, what are some tactics that you would suggest to help with that?

I think it's naturally happening, Amanda. I really do think that it seems very clear. And I'll just use my own personal example or experiences from walking factory floors, from talking with leaders in manufacturing organizations. They're all excited about how they're evolving their workforce and the way people work within their organizations. It's happening. I think one of the main challenges most manufacturing organizations have today is they're not branding it appropriately. They're not sharing their experiences in a way for people to understand that these are not the same physical jobs they would have thought. These are technical jobs now. And a lot of, I would say, early career people would be very fascinated with jobs that allow them to apply cognitive skills to the work that they're doing and not to feel like the job itself is a root, do the same thing over and over again, task type of a role. And that's just not what's happening right now. A lot of those routine tasks are being handled by the machines where the individuals are checking for defects. They're checking for the machines' mistakes. They're actually doing a type of additional study that would be required to ensure that the processes are moving smoothly. And that's a much different role than I think most people are aware of, but they won't find that out unless organizations do their best to manage the communication about what's happening on the factory floors for themselves, through their branding, through their messaging, through their employee profiles, the types of things that individuals who are looking to come to work for their organizations are really seeking.

Is there a way leaders can position these job titles differently? Like what are you seeing as the literal titles that are getting posted? And is there a shift for organizations that have really brought in some of these autonomous or AI-powered mechanisms and to distinguish, hey, it's not the average manufacturing job, it's this now? Like what are some of I'm just curious about some of the verbiage that you're seeing.

Yeah, sure. So one running joke I would have with a friend of mine is that there was a time when every company had to be a dot-com company for someone to take an interest. Uh and right now I think we're sort of seeing the same thing with AI. So you do see a lot of organizations adding AI to the title of a job. I'm not necessarily sure that's totally uh uh necessary. And I certainly think if it's not appropriate, it's probably not advised. Yeah. Um, but certainly I think when you start looking at technician positions or maintenance positions, it does give you an opportunity to incorporate it a bit in the title, especially if you're working alongside of digital coworkers that actually you'll be working directly with. So it's worth adding that in as necessary. I think probably more than anything, aside from the title, it's the job description. Because frankly, I think you know as well as I do, people looking for jobs are using AI to try and find jobs right now. They're not going to job boards, they're not going to websites as much as they used to. So if your job is rated appropriately with the right type of information that conveys what they'll be doing and the type of innovations that you're working with, I think you'll be better served.

All right. If we look down the road, like five years from now, what would you say is your ultimate vision for how people and machines will coexist in manufacturing?

Yeah, it's really neat. We have most recently started talking with a humanoid organization that's actually on the forefront. And I referred back again to your conversation with Adam. I thought it was really neat because he's totally right. General purpose uh humanoids, I think, are going to be the things that are most available and most useful in the near term. And it's neat to just see that we're working with an organization that's doing that right now. But I raise that as a specific example, the fact that within five years, I think we're going to see general purpose robots supporting a variety of different work in the physical space, working alongside of coworkers who are either managing their work with them or guiding them or scripting what work they do, or simply working alongside of them. And I think that to the extent that people recognize, and I think they will soon, I think some of that hype and frustration and fear mongering to your other point, I've seen in the last two months has started to subside a bit. And I think people are starting to recognize that this isn't actually taking jobs per se. It's shifting the jobs. And so as you find five years from now, people literally working right alongside of digital coworkers doing work with them, then there'll be more ease at what's available for people to do beyond that as well. So I'm excited to be on a factory floor to see that more. It's certainly there now, but I think somewhere in about 10%, I guess, is is is what some studies say. I I think in five years we could at least double that or more. And it'll just be interesting to see how that changes in terms of the creativity and the output of manufacturing more broadly.

All right. And now for the HR lens, how do you see HR professionals coexisting with machines?

Five years. Um I think that chapter hasn't been written yet. Yeah. And I think for all of my colleagues in the space, I would say take a breath and recognize that HR and town acquisition are still functions that are greatly needed within organizations. And if you look at the arc of time, a lot of the administrative tasks that have taken place in HR have quietly gone away over the last 30 years. And what it's left is a focus on HR and TA helping organizations figure out what they actually need going forward and the types of plans they need to put in place to make sure people have the skills and the training necessary to help them pull the business forward. So I think in five years' time, you'll find more focus on learning and development. You'll find more focus on retention. And I think you'll find more focus on talent acquisition space, on mapping people more effectively to roles where, once again, the resumes may not necessarily indicate they're the best fit. So that's the fun work ahead. It's less administrative, which is, I think, really pretty neat and cool. Um, but that's the work ahead. And I think there's just so much to be done that I think once people sort of get over the angst and frustration about what might be happening in the moment, they'll realize these tools might help them be more effective in their own careers as much as it will have their organizations.

All right. My final question, we love to throw a curveball at all of our guests. And so the one I want to ask you is what do you think robots can teach us about being human?

That's very interesting. I've seen some videos of some of the sort of new humanoid robots that are out there right now. And if there's one thing that's sort of top of mind that I think is interesting is they do make a ton of mistakes right now. They make a ton of mistakes, but because they don't have feelings, they don't know it. So maybe one of the things they can teach us is to be more brave and more fearless and don't worry about making mistakes. You know, just start all over and do it again, learn from what you did and pick up and move on. That that may be the one thing that we can learn right now from robots, at least based on what I've seen. I love it. Greg, thank you so much for joining me. Of course. Really nice to be with you.

Thanks for tuning in to People B4 Machines, conversations on the chaos of factory automation powered by Eclipse. We're here to challenge the status quo in factory automation because machines don't build factories. People do. The technical producer for this podcast is Ryan Dentinger. I'm Amanda Cupido. Did you like today's episode? If so, we'd appreciate it if you share it with anyone in your network who's tired of the automation echo chamber. And of course, be sure to hit that follow button on your favorite podcast player because there's a lot more where this came from. And remember, the future isn't fully automated, it's people powered. Talk to you soon.

Thanks for listening to People B4 Machines. Conversations on the chaos of factory automation from Monday morning to the very near future. For past podcast episodes, search people before machines on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, YouTube, EclipseAutomation.com.