Managers · code 1219

Business services and administration managers not elsewhere classified

AI can do the reports and guidelines. Keeping the organisation running is still management.

AI could take a fair chunk of three of the ten tasks, led by writing procedures and pulling together financial reports and budgets. Strategic advice and managing staff are mostly out of its reach.

What they actually do (and what else they get called)

This unit group covers business services and administration managers not classified elsewhere in Minor Group 121: Business Services and Administration Managers. For instance, the group includes occupations such as facilities manager, cleaning services manager and administrative services manager employed either as the manager of a department of a large enterprise and organization, or of an enterprise that provides such services to other enterprises and organizations. In such cases tasks would include - (a) providing administrative, strategic planning and operational support, research and advice to senior management on matters such as the management of building facilities and administrative services; (b) developing and managing the organization’s administrative and physical resources; (c) developing and implementing administrative and procedural statements and guidelines for use by staff in the organization; (d) analysing complex resource management issues and initiatives that affect the organization, and preparing associated reports, correspondence and submissions; (e) providing information and support for the preparation of financial reports and budgets; (f) leading, managing and developing administrative staff to ensure smooth business operations and the provision of accurate and timely information; (g) representing the enterprise or organization in negotiations, and at conventions, seminars, public hearings and forums; (h) establishing and managing budgets, controlling expenditure and ensuring the efficient use of resources; (i) planning and directing daily operations; (j) overseeing the selection, training and performance of staff. Examples of the occupations classified here: - Administrative services manager - Cleaning services manager - Corporate services manager - Facilities manager

department manager
manufacturing facility manager
corporate social responsibility manager
business service manager
defence administration officer
quality services manager
project manager

Job titles from the EU's ESCO list. Search for any of them on the jobs page and you'll end up here.

58 / 100

Changing significantly

AI could do a real share of the everyday tasks. The job is changing shape, not vanishing.

Not the odds you keep your job. It's how much of the everyday work still needs a person, out of 100.

← Robot's turf Human's turf →

The ILO's official verdict: Exposed: Gradient 2

338 of 427 for holding up against AI

Why this score?

The ILO rated each of this job's 10 tasks for how much of it AI could do. They average 41.9 out of 100, so it holds up at 100 − 41.9 = 58.1.

That's the whole sum. No black box, no secret sauce: you can check it against the ILO's study. ILO group “Exposed: Gradient 2”: A good share of the tasks are affected.

This job rates 36.1 out of 100 for how hands-on it is. The score above only looks at AI tools, not robots, but for work this far from the physical that matters less.

from the source Working Paper 140, Generative AI and Jobs 2025 index data 0.8-observed-use

Man v Bot · compare

Who holds up better?

Business services and administration managers not elsewhere classified 58

Go on, try your partner's job. Or your sibling's. We won't tell.

Man v Bot

Where the bot helps, and where the human wins

Bot

What AI takes

The routine stuff. You may not miss it.

Guidelines and procedures.
Financial reports and budgets.
Analysis and correspondence.

Man

What people still do better

Judgement, trust and skilled hands. Hard to download.

Leading staff.
Negotiations.
Decisions about resources.

Both

What's arriving

New work that only exists because the AI does.

Running AI in back-office work.
Sustainability and ESG reporting.
Shared services and automation.

Written by a human, from the ILO's task ratings below. Yes, we see the irony. Read it as one person's take.

Meet your two rivals

They're not the same machine. AI software can only reach the parts of a job done on a screen or in words. A chatbot can't climb a ladder. A robot might, one day, if it doesn't fall off.

The AI

Lives in a screen. Never had to fix a boiler.

Threat level: Medium

46 could do without you

It could take over some of the work, and help with more. It could help with 71 of 100.

The robot

The wildcard. Has hands, still working out stairs.

How much it matters here: Lower

36 how hands-on

Not much of this job needs hands, so the robot can sit this one out.

So could a robot do the physical part?

Less than half of this job is hands-on. Robots still matter, but for a smaller part of the work, so we don't sort it any further.

Robots hate fiddly work in awkward spaces. On that measure, this job scores 14 out of 100. The higher it is, the longer the robot waits.

36 How
hands-on

14 How fiddly
and cramped

Kind of hands-on work Less than half hands-on

The small print

They aren't a robot score, and nothing on this page is. Nobody measures how far robots have got well enough to put a number on it. These are the closest thing we have: how hands-on the job is, and how much fiddly, cramped work it takes, which is what Frey and Osborne found hardest for machines.

From O*NET, averaged across 18 US jobs , so treat it as rough.

finger skill 17.4 · hand skill 12.2 · cramped spaces 13.2 · averaged · rule: hands-on under 50

estimated O*NET 31.0 BLS occupational crosswalk chain ISCO-08 to 2010 SOC (Aug 2012, rev. Jun 2015); 2010 to 2018 SOC (Nov 2017); O*NET-SOC 2019 taxonomy data 0.8-observed-use measures chosen by Frey & Osborne (2017) · the grouping is a sorting, not a measurement

The job, task by task

Every job is really a bundle of tasks. Here's this one unpacked, with how much of each AI could do, out of 100. The score is the average, and averages can hide a lot.

AI's favourite task here scores 57, against an average of 42. The bigger the gap, the more lopsided the job: some of it wide open to AI, some of it barely touched.

56
Developing and implementing administrative and procedural statements and guidelines for use by staff in the organization

Medium
56
Providing information and support for the preparation of financial reports and budgets

Medium
56
Analysing complex resource management issues and initiatives that affect the organization, and preparing associated reports, correspondence and submissions

Medium
38
Developing and managing the organization's administrative and physical resources

Low
37
Leading, managing and developing administrative staff to ensure smooth business operations and the provision of accurate and timely information

Low
37
Representing the enterprise or organization in negotiations, and at conventions, seminars, public hearings and forums

Low
37
Establishing and managing budgets, controlling expenditure and ensuring the efficient use of resources

Low
37
Planning and directing daily operations

Low
36
Providing administrative, strategic planning and operational support, research and advice to senior management on matters such as the management of building facilities and administrative services

Low
30
Overseeing the selection, training and performance of staff.

Low

10 tasks · the High to Very Low labels are the ILO's

from the source Working Paper 140, Generative AI and Jobs 2025 index data 0.8-observed-use

Sidekick or replacement?

A tool that makes you faster is a very different thing from one that does the task while you watch. Jobs and Skills Australia measured the two separately, which is handy.

AI helps you: 71
AI does it for you: 46

Sidekick wins, by 25 points.

How good a match is this?

3 Australian jobs match this one, and we've simply averaged them. Treat the numbers as a rough guide.

estimated Our Gen AI Transition (Gen AI Capacity Study) September 2025 detailed data release data 0.8-observed-use matched to Australian jobs 1321, 1492, 1499

Meanwhile, in real life…

Everything else here is about what AI could do. This is what people actually did. When they asked Claude for help with this kind of work, did they hand the whole task over, or roll their sleeves up and work through it together?

Out of every 100 conversations

worked through it together handed it over

The small print

Anthropic publishes this about its own product, and it doesn't feed into any score here. These are people who use Claude, not workers in general, so little use here doesn't mean AI can't reach the job. This job makes up 1.17% of the conversations.

The data is sorted by US job, and this one matches 16 of them. We've combined them, counting each by how often it comes up in the conversations, so the busiest one counts most.

These two add up to 100. The bars elsewhere on the page don't, because each is scored on its own, so we don't put them side by side.

observed use Anthropic Economic Index release 2026-06-26, period beginning 2026-05-01 data 0.8-observed-use 2026-05-01 · Anthropic, about its own product

So, should business services managers be worried?

Short answer: not worried, but paying attention. The job is changing.

The admin is moving. Guidelines, financial reports and analysing resource issues are rated Medium; resources, leadership, negotiation, budgets, operations, advice and hiring are Low. AI will take on reports and analysis; leadership stays human.

Worth remembering: we score tasks, not jobs. When AI takes on a task, the job usually reshuffles around it rather than vanishing.

Where this job could lead

None of the new jobs we've written up start from here yet. Could be you're the first. See the jobs AI is creating →

How are the neighbours doing?

There are 30 jobs in the “Managers” family, averaging 64. This one is below the family average.

Pit this against any other job →