As AI absorbs more of the tasks that once defined early careers — the research, the drafts, the foundational “grunt work” — media organizations are reckoning with a deceptively simple question: what happens to the people who were supposed to learn by doing it?
Chad Maxwell, President of KSM Media, argues that the industry is asking the wrong question. Efficiency and capability aren’t the same thing, and confusing them may be the costliest mistake organizations make in the AI era. Here, he shares his thinking on junior hiring, mentorship, and what it actually means to build talent when the tools keep changing.
CYNOPSIS: AI is handling more of the work that used to be entry level—research, first drafts, and basic analysis. From your perspective, does that make junior hiring more urgent or less urgent right now?
CHAD MAXWELL: AI is changing far more than entry-level jobs. It’s changing how organizations think about work, teams, and ultimately how expertise gets created. I don’t see this as a question of urgency: it’s one of intentionality.
As leaders, we have to be purposeful about designing roles, building teams, and creating learning environments that continue to develop great people. AI may change the mechanics of the work, but it doesn’t change the need for organizations to build skills.
One of my concerns is that AI becomes the justification for investing less in people because technology can do more. The opposite is true. As the way we work changes, we have to become even more thoughtful about hiring. AI gives organizations more capacity; growing people creates capability. Those aren’t the same thing and confusing them is one of the biggest risks organizations face today.
What do you actually look for in a junior candidate today that you wouldn’t have prioritized five years ago?
One thing that hasn’t changed is what I value in people. Character beats credentials.
We’re looking even more closely at curiosity, initiative, communication, adaptability, and what I call “figure-it-outers.” We want investigators, connectors, and people who naturally ask better questions that uncover new opportunities for clients and the agency.
The reality is that technical skills matter, but they can quickly become outdated.
AI will continue to evolve, but character, judgment, and a growth mindset only become more valuable. It’s not an either-or proposition. The strongest talent combines both technical capability and the ability to keep learning.
Are you screening for AI fluency in interviews? If so, what does that actually look like in practice?
We don’t expect candidates to be AI experts. It’s not a realistic expectation given the speed of change. Rather, we’re looking for AI curiosity, receptivity, and discernment.
Have they explored AI thoughtfully? Can they articulate when it helps, when it doesn’t, and whether they are using it as a collaborator or simply outsourcing their thinking?
We’re living in a “bridge world” right now. The strongest candidates aren’t choosing between AI and traditional ways of working. They’re learning how to combine the best of both. AI is simply the latest tool in the toolkit.
Some firms are pulling back on entry level headcount and leaning on AI to fill the gap. What’s the case against that approach?
Leaders have always faced the same challenge: How do we develop the next generation of experts? The need remains constant, but the way we train employees continues to evolve.
Most conversations about entry-level hiring focus on staffing models, succession planning, or labor economics. Those are important discussions, but the bigger issue is organizational learning and how it is created and institutionalized. AI is forcing organizations to rethink what that looks like – no matter what level.
If companies eliminate opportunities to learn without intentionally replacing them, they may become more efficient today but quietly reduce their ability to solve problems.
Efficiency creates capacity. Learning creates capability. Organizations need both.
Junior talent has traditionally learned by doing the foundational work, the “grunt work.” If AI absorbs more of those tasks, how do organizations ensure employees are still developing the skills and judgment they need?
One thing we sometimes overlook is that organizations don’t just teach skills. They teach standards, judgment, context, and ways of working.
The idea that learning came primarily from “grunt work” is concerning because, if that was the value proposition agencies offered junior employees, it was already vulnerable. People don’t develop simply by completing tasks. They learn by understanding why decisions are made, what quality looks like, how clients think, how teams collaborate, and what professionalism looks like in practice.
AI can absolutely accelerate execution, but it cannot replace the human process of building experience, transmitting culture, and developing institutional knowledge.
Organizations need to rethink how talent development happens. As AI changes the tasks people perform, leaders must be more intentional about creating opportunities for employees to build context, ask better questions, critically evaluate outputs, connect ideas across disciplines, and understand how the broader system works — not just their individual role within it.
What does a strong mentor to junior relationships look like when AI is part of every workflow?
The best mentors I’ve had weren’t valuable because they had all the answers. They were valuable because they helped me think differently. They challenged my assumptions, expanded my perspective, and helped me understand the reasoning behind decisions.
That becomes even more important with AI. When answers are easier to access, the differentiator becomes judgment: knowing which answers matter, how to apply them, and when to question them.
Great mentors help people develop the curiosity and confidence to navigate an increasingly complex environment. They help someone understand not just what to do, but why it matters and when one approach is better than another.
AI changes the tools we use, but it doesn’t change the human responsibility to prepare the next generation of professionals.
