Automation index
How much of a Geographer’s job can AI already do?
A map and a layer clip come earlier. Reading the territory and signing off the plan do not.
This percentage does not predict how many people will lose their jobs.
Task comparison
IS WORK OVER?
Geographer
29%
AI can already do 29% of this job.
#59 / 643
View rankingGeographer
Where the time goes
Task weights are our estimates based on O*NET frequency data, not time shares published by O*NET.
The time saving for each task is estimated separately.
| Task | Share | AI | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
GIS, layers, clips and working maps.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 18% | 48% | +8.6 |
Impact reports, demography and land use.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 40% | +6.4 |
Fieldwork, interviews and checking what the map says.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 18% | 18% | +3.2 |
Planning, objections and work with the council.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 28% | +4.5 |
Explain, map for non-experts and teaching.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 22% | +3.5 |
The territorial opinion and owning the report.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 14% | +2.2 |
| Total | 100% | 28% |
Modelled workweek: 100% · Public evidence: 0% · Estimate: 100% · Confidence: Low
Skills and activities
- read territory
- run GIS
- impact reports
- land use
- fieldwork
- spatial planning
- working maps
- planning objections
Sources for this job· O*NET 19-3092.00· ESCO/ISCO 2632
IS WORK OVER?
Clinical research associate
27%
#172 / 643
View rankingClinical research associate
Where the time goes
Task weights are our estimates based on O*NET frequency data, not time shares published by O*NET.
The time saving for each task is estimated separately.
| Task | Share | AI | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
Protocol, CRF and the monitoring visit.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 18% | 48% | +8.6 |
Source, the gap and the one that does not fit.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 40% | +6.4 |
Adverse event, the deadline and not delaying.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 22% | +3.5 |
Consent, the signature and the one who did not understand.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 28% | +4.5 |
The sponsor, the audit and not dressing the figure.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 18% | 14% | +2.5 |
Audit, and not leaving a made-up figure.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 12% | +1.9 |
| Total | 100% | 27% |
Modelled workweek: 100% · Public evidence: 0% · Estimate: 100% · Confidence: Low
Skills and activities
- CRF
- monitoring
- adverse events
- informed consent
- source data
- trial audits
- clinical protocols
- site visits
Sources for this job· O*NET 11-9121.00· ESCO/ISCO 2131