Skip to content
man bot
Compare

Professionals · code 2621

Archivists and curators

AI can index the archive. Deciding what's worth keeping is still an archivist.

AI could take a fair chunk of four of the ten tasks, led by managing digital records and deciding what to keep. Cataloguing and building collections are mostly out of its reach.

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

Archivists and curators collect, appraise and ensure the safekeeping and preservation of the contents of archives, artefacts and records of historical, cultural, administrative and artistic interest, and of art and other objects. They plan, devise and implement systems for the safekeeping of records and historically valuable documents. Tasks include - (a) evaluating and preserving records for administrative, historical, legal, evidential and other purposes; (b) directing or carrying out the preparation of indexes, bibliographies, microfilm copies and other reference aids to the collected material and making them available to users; (c) researching the origin, distribution and use of materials and objects of cultural and historical interest; (d) organizing, developing and maintaining collections of artistic, cultural, scientific or historically significant items; (e) directing or undertaking classification and cataloguing of museum and art gallery collections and organizing exhibitions; (f) researching into, appraising, organizing and preserving historically significant and valuable documents such as government papers, private papers, photographs, maps, manuscripts and audiovisual materials; (g) preparing scholarly papers and reports; (h) planning and implementing the computerized management of archives and electronic records; (i) organizing exhibitions at museums and art galleries, publicizing exhibits and arranging special displays for general, specialized or educational interest; (j) appraising and acquiring archival materials to build and develop an archival collection for research purposes. Examples of the occupations classified here: - Archivist - Art gallery curator - Museum curator - Records manager

  • arts education officer
  • collection manager
  • exhibition curator
  • zoo registrar
  • conservator
  • mediation and education manager
  • archivist
  • museum scientist
  • exhibition registrar

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

53 / 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

365 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 47.3 out of 100, so it holds up at 100 − 47.3 = 52.7.

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 42.6 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?

Archivists and curators 53

v

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.

  • Digital records management.
  • Indexes and catalogues.
  • Research papers.

Man

What people still do better

Judgement, trust and skilled hands. Hard to download.

  • Choosing what to collect and keep.
  • Curating exhibitions.
  • Caring for objects.

Both

What's arriving

New work that only exists because the AI does.

  • AI search across collections.
  • Preserving digital records.
  • Proving authenticity of records.

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

42 could do without you

It could take over some of the work, and help with more. It could help with 73 of 100.

The robot

The wildcard. Has hands, still working out stairs.

How much it matters here: Some

43 how hands-on

A fair part of this job is hands-on, so robots would be needed for that part, not just software.

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 25 out of 100. The higher it is, the longer the robot waits.

43 How
hands-on
25 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 2 US jobs .

finger skill 29.5 · hand skill 27.8 · cramped spaces 18.8 · 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 67, against an average of 47. The bigger the gap, the more lopsided the job: some of it wide open to AI, some of it barely touched.

  1. 67

    Planning and implementing the computerized management of archives and electronic records

    Medium
  2. 59

    Evaluating and preserving records for administrative, historical, legal, evidential and other purposes

    Medium
  3. 55

    Directing or carrying out the preparation of indexes, bibliographies, microfilm copies and other reference aids to the collected material and making them available to users

    Medium
  4. 54

    Preparing scholarly papers and reports

    Medium
  5. 47

    Researching into, appraising, organizing and preserving historically significant and valuable documents such as government papers, private papers, photographs, maps, manuscripts and audiovisual materials

    Low
  6. 46

    Researching the origin, distribution and use of materials and objects of cultural and historical interest

    Low
  7. 45

    Appraising and acquiring archival materials to build and develop an archival collection for research purposes.

    Low
  8. 35

    Organizing exhibitions at museums and art galleries, publicizing exhibits and arranging special displays for general, specialized or educational interest

    Low
  9. 35

    Directing or undertaking classification and cataloguing of museum and art gallery collections and organizing exhibitions

    Low
  10. 32

    Organizing, developing and maintaining collections of artistic, cultural, scientific or historically significant items

    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
73
AI does it for you
42

Sidekick wins, by 31 points.

How good a match is this?

2 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 2242, 2349

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

57
43

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 0.19% of the conversations.

The data is sorted by US job, and this one matches 2 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 archivists and curators be worried?

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

Parts of it are changing. Digital archives, preserving records, indexes and papers are rated Medium; research, acquisitions, exhibitions and managing collections are Low. AI takes on cataloguing and search; curation 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 92 jobs in the “Professionals” family, averaging 61. This one is below the family average.

Pit this against any other job →