Ever heard someone say, “I facilitate stakeholder alignment across cross-functional work streams,” and wondered what they actually do? If you’ve set foot in the corporate world, you’ve probably encountered job titles and explanations that sound both impressive and baffling. This kind of jargon can make even project management roles sound mysterious—sometimes even to the people who hold those titles.

But vague job descriptions aren’t just corporate in-jokes. Many employees in white-collar settings report feeling disconnected from tangible accomplishments. In fact, some say they can complete their required work in mere hours, while others admit to spending long days at the office with little sense of real achievement.

The Origins of Corporate Bloat

To understand how we got here, it helps to look back at the Industrial Revolution, when expanding industries needed complex management structures to coordinate vast workforces. Innovations like Frederick Taylor’s “scientific management” treated workers almost like machines, focusing on hyper-efficiency—even if this mostly benefited management.

Later, the “M-form” (multi-divisional form) structure became the norm: dividing companies into specialized teams, each with its own middle managers. This was supposed to increase efficiency, but also led to sprawling hierarchies. Efforts to “flatten” organizations have come and gone—shareholders in the ‘80s and ‘90s tried to reduce management bloat, but the complexities of global business brought the managers (and their sometimes-cryptic roles) right back.

Confusing Titles, Fuzzy Duties

Climbing the corporate ladder often means taking on a manager title, whether or not real management is needed. Job titles like “Business Optimization Specialist” or “Synergy Manager” abound, and sometimes even employees struggle to explain what they do day to day. Promotions are frequently tied to new titles instead of more meaningful or specialized work.

A 2022 Harvard Business School study found that managers made up 13% of the U.S. labor force, up from just 9.2% in 1983. Yet many say their workday is dominated by “work about work”—meetings, emails, and status updates, not skilled or creative output.

AI and the “Great Flattening”

One would think technology, especially AI, would help cut down on busy work or unnecessary roles. In some ways, it has: generative AI has reportedly reduced time spent on email and routine documents, and some large companies are once again pushing to cut middle management layers. Amazon, for example, is raising the ratio of individual contributors to managers—but this often just shifts extra reporting and admin work to frontline employees, not always making work itself more meaningful.

Do These Jobs Matter?

Despite the frustrations, quality managers—those who actually enable communication and solve problems—are often essential to preventing organizational chaos. The problem is the sheer excess and occasional misplacement of such roles. Too many layers? Costs increase for everyone, sometimes driving up the price of what the company sells.

Ultimately, dissatisfaction seems connected less to job titles or “BS” work per se, and more to the lack of perceived accomplishment. If workers feel their real skills aren’t being used, or that bureaucracy stifles meaningful output, it’s no wonder they check out.

The Bottom Line:
Corporate bloat and confusing job titles are symptoms of bigger organizational and economic complexities. While AI may trim some busywork, the quest for a sense of purpose at work—and for leaner, more functional corporate structures—is far from over.

A new survey is raising eyebrows after revealing that 77% of Gen Z workers admitted to bringing a parent along to a job interview. The surprising statistic highlights a growing trend of parental involvement in the workplace that has left many hiring managers puzzled—and sometimes frustrated.

The survey, conducted among 831 Gen Z adults, sheds light on a generational shift in how younger workers approach their careers. While previous generations often took pride in independence during the job-hunting process, today’s young professionals seem to rely more heavily on family support.

Experts suggest a few reasons behind the trend:

• Helicopter Parenting: Many Gen Z workers were raised by parents who were highly involved in their schooling, extracurriculars, and early career planning.
• High-Stakes Job Market: With competition for jobs at an all-time high, some young adults feel more comfortable with a parent by their side as a source of reassurance.
• Confidence Gap: Entering the workforce after years of remote schooling and disrupted early job experience due to the pandemic has left some applicants less certain about interviews.

While some employers may perceive parental involvement as unprofessional, others argue it highlights strong family bonds and support systems. However, bringing a parent into the interview room inevitably raises concerns about independence, maturity, and decision-making capabilities.

This statistic is just one piece of a larger picture: the same survey found that 53% of Gen Z had parents speak with hiring managers on their behalf, 73% said parents helped complete work assignments, and 45% reported parents regularly talking to their current manager.

As Gen Z continues to make up more of the workforce, companies may need to adapt to new dynamics—or risk alienating the youngest generation of employees. The big question for employers now is: how much parental involvement is too much?

Would you like me to frame this article more critically (focusing on concerns from employers) or more sympathetically (emphasizing Gen Z pressures and family support)

Gen Z, the generation born between the late 1990s and early 2010s, is facing one of the toughest job markets in decades. Despite being told that higher education and digital skills would open doors, millions are finding those doors firmly closed or simply illusions. Here’s a deep dive into what’s driving this unprecedented crisis.

Entry-Level Jobs Are Vanishing

Once, starting a career meant replying to job ads or handing in a resume. Now, Gen Z faces a maze of obstacles. According to recent reports, 75% of employers say they’re struggling to fill vacancies, and yet responses to applications are rare. In a 2022 study, only 12% of more than 300 job applications submitted by interns received any kind of reply, and not one led to a hire—even though these candidates matched job requirements. Strangely, the more qualified the applicant, the more likely employers were to “ghost” them.

A central problem is the rise of “ghost jobs”—fake or inactive listings companies post without any intention to hire. Surveys show that 81% of recruiters admit their organization has posted such listings, some reporting that half their openings are not real. The reasons vary: keeping up the appearance of growth, building databases to sell, scaring employees into higher productivity, or simply making teams believe help is coming. It’s a widespread, institutionalized deception.

Data Exploitation and Global Job Market Manipulation

The issue is international. In Japan, job search giant Rukunabi was caught selling predictive data about candidates directly to employers, affecting entire career paths. Rukunabi’s parent company also owns major platforms such as Indeed and Glassdoor, linking data manipulation from Tokyo to New York. These practices have become normalized; in 2024, online job listings were only half as likely to result in a hire as in 2020.

Ghost postings are now so common that the U.S. Library of Congress officially recognized them as a modern job market threat. Yet, while some state lawmakers have proposed reforms, no federal legislation addresses this systemic problem or the economic forces undermining careers for half a century.

Experience Required—But How to Get It?

Entry-level positions are supposed to be entry points, but that’s no longer true. Surveys show that 94% of employers now require previous experience for these roles (even in tech), and nearly 40% of entry-level listings on platforms like LinkedIn demand 3–5 years of experience1. That leaves internships—often unpaid—as the only path in. But competition is fierce: some firms receive tens of thousands of applications for a handful of internships, and nearly half of all internships are unpaid, locking out anyone lacking financial resources.

Paid interns are much more likely to get job offers, deepening a class divide where only those who can afford to work for free get a real chance to advance.

The Global Reality

It isn’t just an American problem. In Canada, Gen Z unemployment is over 12%—double that of older workers. In China, it’s nearly 16%, with young people dubbed “rat people” to mock their prospects. Meanwhile, AI and automation threaten to wipe out half of all entry-level jobs as soon as five years from now, potentially displacing 45 million U.S. workers by 2030. Yet, corporate investment in job training has collapsed, leaving young workers to sink or swim on their own.

Wages Lag, Costs Soar

For Gen Z, even those who find work must contend with stagnating pay and skyrocketing costs. Since 1970, the U.S. dollar has lost roughly 85% of its value. Wages rose just 29% while productivity jumped 80%. Gen Z carries more personal debt than any previous cohort, with major expenses like rent, health insurance, and car insurance far outstripping any modest gains in income.

Almost half of full-time American workers now make less than what the minimum wage would be if it had kept up with productivity, further exacerbating economic insecurity and resentment.

What Next? A Call for Real Change

Standard advice—network harder, polish your resume, send thank-you notes—rings hollow when the entire system is stacked against newcomers. The root of Gen Z’s crisis is institutional: fake job postings, predatory data practices, impossible standards for “entry-level” roles, collapsing wages, and an economic model that rewards automation over human job creation.

If there is hope, it lies in solidarity, transparency, and honest conversation. Policy must catch up with reality to ensure genuine opportunity: enforce real job listing standards, invest in job training, address the misuse of worker and applicant data, and reimagine economic rewards to support—not punish—each new generation.

Gen Z’s struggle isn’t due to individual failings; it’s the product of a broken, manipulated system. Facing this openly is the first step to creating a better future.