What would you say if every year you had to apply again for your own position?

Applying for your own job: the new reality or a dangerous experiment?

What would happen if a company announced that every year its employees must officially reapply for their positions - this time in competition with external candidates? At first glance, this sounds like an extreme, even absurd idea. But if we look more closely at the way business already operates, we will see that this logic is not so far from reality. In fact, in many places it already exists - it just hasn't been formalized.

In recent years, especially in the context of digitalization and the rise of artificial intelligence, companies have begun to think of roles not as stable positions, but as dynamic functions that must constantly prove their value. Performance evaluations are no longer an annual formal act, but a continuous process. Data replaces intuition, and algorithms begin to influence decisions about development, promotion, or dismissal. In this environment, the idea of “defending your place” gradually transforms from a metaphor into practice.

There are also specific examples that show how this logic materializes into real actions. One of the most discussed cases is that of HSBC, where during internal restructuring employees were placed in a situation to reapply for their own positions. Formally, this is explained by the need for a new organizational structure and optimization of roles, but for the affected people, the effect is clear - their job is no longer guaranteed, but conditional. They must compete, sometimes even with their colleagues, to keep their place.

Similar practices have been observed in other large organizations, including BT Group and Air France-KLM, where during reorganizations certain roles are closed and employees are forced to apply for newly created positions. Although not always identical in form, these processes follow the same logic: the position does not belong to the person - the person must prove that they belong to the position.

This approach has its rational side. In a dynamic economy, where skills become obsolete quickly, and technologies change entire industries, companies seek maximum efficiency and adaptability. From this perspective, the idea of “restarting” roles and selecting the most suitable people seems logical. It promises meritocracy, flexibility, and better alignment between talent and business needs.

But the cost of this logic often remains underestimated. When employees are placed in constant competition - even for their own job - something fundamental is destroyed: trust. Loyalty weakens, long-term commitment is replaced by short-term survival, and the culture of collaboration can easily turn into a culture of internal competition. Ultimately, the company may gain a more efficient structure but lose the people who make it sustainable.

Here, the role of artificial intelligence comes into play, which accelerates this process. AI systems can now analyze performance, productivity, and behavior on a scale that was previously unthinkable. This gives management a sense of objectivity and control, but it also turns evaluation into a continuous process. In such an environment, formal “reapplying” may not even be necessary - because it is already happening constantly, just in a less noticeable form.

Therefore, the real question is not whether companies will introduce a model where every year we apply for our own positions. Much more important is to ask ourselves whether we are already living in a softer, but more permanent version of it. Because when every action is measured, every performance is analyzed, and every role is reviewed, the boundary between stability and conditionality begins to blur.

And then there remains one simple, but uncomfortable question: if tomorrow you really had to reapply for your job - would you get it?

Sources: hrgrapevine.com · ceotodaymagazine.com · benefitnews.com