Automation index
How much of a NGO programme officer’s job can AI already do?
A report and an indicator come earlier. The project existing outside the slide deck do not.
This percentage does not predict how many people will lose their jobs.
Task comparison
IS WORK OVER?
NGO programme officer
26%
AI can already do 26% of this job.
#218 / 643
View rankingNGO programme officer
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
Design, indicators and the report.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 48% | +7.7 |
Justify, invoices and the donor.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 36% | +5.8 |
Field or neighbourhood and what does not fit the frame.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 18% | 16% | +2.9 |
Partners, meetings and coordination.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 28% | +4.5 |
The surprise, the cut and redoing the timetable.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 18% | 18% | +3.2 |
That it works, and not inflating the indicator.EstimateNo public source provides a precise figure. This is our estimate. | 16% | 14% | +2.2 |
| Total | 100% | 26% |
Modelled workweek: 100% · Public evidence: 0% · Estimate: 100% · Confidence: Low
Skills and activities
- design projects
- justify to donors
- indicators
- activity report
- coordinate partners
- timetable
- project invoices
- neighbourhood work
Sources for this job· O*NET 21-1093.00· ESCO/ISCO 2635
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