A new analysis of nearly 22,000 companies reveals a striking contradiction in the AI jobs debate: firms spending the most on artificial intelligence are actually hiring faster, including entry-level positions that many feared would disappear. The finding complicates the gloomy narrative of AI-driven mass unemployment, though it also suggests the benefits may be concentrated among a narrow slice of well-resourced companies.

Through May 2026, companies announced close to 90,000 job cuts tied to AI, and some economists project that up to 15% of U.S. jobs could be eliminated by AI over the next five years. For recent graduates and early-career workers, the anxiety is real. But a joint report from Ramp and Revelio Labs, which analyzed enterprise AI spending and workforce records, found that "high-intensity adopters" of AI saw their headcount increase by 10.2%.

Which Companies Are Actually Hiring in the AI Era?

High-intensity adopters are defined as firms spending an average of $30 per employee per month on AI in their first three months of adoption. These companies grew headcount across multiple functions, not just engineering. The strongest job growth occurred in the information sector, which includes software, internet, media, and tech-adjacent firms.

The hiring gains span a wide range of roles:

• Engineering positions: Grew as companies built AI capabilities internally and expanded product development teams.
• Sales and marketing roles: Expanded as AI-enabled companies scaled their go-to-market operations.
• Customer service and administration: Increased despite AI automation tools, suggesting firms used efficiency gains to expand operations rather than cut staff.
• Finance and scientist roles: Added as companies invested in data infrastructure and research capabilities.

Perhaps most notably, entry-level headcount actually rose by 12% at high-intensity AI adopters, directly contradicting claims that AI is eliminating junior jobs.

Why Are These Companies Hiring When Others Are Cutting?

The report's authors explained the mechanism behind this counterintuitive finding. "For software and technology firms, AI can make core output cheaper or faster to produce: writing code, debugging, building internal tools, producing technical documentation, and supporting product development," the report noted. "Lower production costs in these workflows can raise the return to expanding the whole firm, not just the engineering team".

In other words, AI isn't always a tool for replacing workers. For some companies, it's a tool for expansion. When AI makes it cheaper to write code or debug software, the return on investment for hiring more engineers, salespeople, and support staff improves. The company can grow faster and capture more market share.

However, the report's authors were careful to note a critical caveat: "This paper does not show that AI universally creates jobs, but it does counter claims that AI will lead to broad job losses".

The Hidden Catch: Not All Companies Benefit Equally

The data skews heavily toward tech-forward, knowledge-work firms, many of which have venture capital backing and were already growing rapidly. This raises a crucial question: Is AI actually creating jobs, or is it simply showing up at companies that were expanding anyway? The report doesn't definitively answer this, but it does highlight a troubling pattern.

Companies that bought AI subscriptions and ran pilots but did not make sustained investments saw no gains in headcount. This sets up the potential for a widening gap between firms with the resources to turn AI adoption into real business gains and those stuck experimenting with subscriptions.

The resources that matter include capital, technical staff, founder networks, and management bandwidth. The report's authors speculated that "firms without those channels may fall behind". In other words, the AI jobs boom may only benefit companies that already have the resources to succeed.

How to Assess Your Company's AI Hiring Trajectory

If you work at a company considering AI adoption, here are key indicators that suggest whether your employer is likely to hire or cut staff:

• Sustained investment level: Companies making sustained, high-intensity AI investments are more likely to grow headcount than those running one-off pilots or buying subscriptions without integration.
• Industry and business model: Tech-forward firms in software, internet, and media sectors saw the strongest hiring gains, while other industries may see different outcomes.
• Cost structure and margins: Firms where AI can significantly reduce production costs for core outputs are more likely to use efficiency gains for expansion rather than layoffs.

Meanwhile, recent research from Goldman Sachs found that AI has already erased about 16,000 net jobs per month over the past year, with Generation Z and entry-level workers taking the brunt of the burden. This suggests that while some companies are hiring, others are cutting faster, creating a net negative effect across the broader economy.

The AI jobs debate, in short, is not a simple story of job creation or destruction. It's a story of divergence. Some companies are using AI to expand and hire aggressively. Others are using it to cut costs and reduce headcount. The question for workers and policymakers is whether the gains at high-intensity adopters will eventually spread to other firms, or whether AI will deepen the divide between well-resourced tech companies and everyone else.