When employers say graduates lack skills, what should the test measure?
Criteria Corp's 2026 Hiring Benchmark Report finds that four in five US hiring professionals believe new graduates lack the skills employers need. We look at what the figures actually measure and what that means for choosing tests in entry-level hiring.
What the new report says
On 6 October 2026, the US assessment provider Criteria Corp released its ninth annual Hiring Benchmark Report through PR Newswire. The report draws on responses from 1,027 US-based hiring professionals across a wide range of industries, company sizes and roles, which the company describes as its largest sample to date.
The figures describe a market pulling in two directions. More than half of respondents (52 percent) say hiring is harder in 2026, yet nearly two thirds expect their organisations to grow headcount in the coming year. The biggest single challenge, named by 55 percent, is finding high-quality candidates with the right skills.
The most striking findings concern new graduates. Four in five hiring professionals say new graduates do not have the skills employers actually need, and only 16 percent believe Gen Z is well prepared for the workplace. Fewer than one in four of the report's own Gen Z respondents say their generation is ready for work. At the same time, 37 percent say AI may be reducing the need to hire entry-level workers.
On AI itself, respondents are split. 71 percent are optimistic about AI in hiring, while 53 percent also believe AI will eliminate more jobs than it creates. Criteria Corp co-founder and CEO Josh Millet says in the release that the pace of change in hiring is unlike anything seen before and that AI is reshaping both sides of the talent equation at once.
How to read the numbers
Three points are worth keeping in mind before drawing conclusions.
First, this is a perception survey. When 80 percent say graduates lack skills, the figure measures what hiring professionals believe, not what candidates can actually do. The release also does not define which skills are meant, so there is no way to tell whether the gap concerns technical knowledge, working habits or something else entirely.
Second, the publisher sells assessments. That does not make the data wrong, but it does mean the framing of the problem naturally points towards the publisher's category of solutions. The release does not describe what respondents are doing in practice or which methods work.
Third, the sample is American. Education systems, internship traditions and labour market rules differ considerably across Europe, so the figures can serve as an indication of a trend at most, not as a local benchmark.
What it means for the use of tests
If you accept the premise that degrees and short work histories tell you less about graduates than they used to, the question becomes what a test should measure in entry-level hiring.
The first question is whether you are measuring current skills or the capacity to acquire new ones. Entry-level roles are, by definition, roles in which the candidate is expected to learn on the job. A test that assumes prior domain knowledge penalises candidates who have not had access to internships, while a test of general problem solving or learning ability is more neutral with respect to background. The right balance depends on the role and should follow from a job analysis.
The second question is how to avoid swapping one unreliable signal for another. If AI-written applications make the CV less informative, it is tempting to put all the weight on a single test score. That is rarely wise. A test result is one data point that should be combined with structured interviews or work samples, with the weighting decided before candidates are seen rather than after.
The third question is documentation. Any organisation introducing or expanding testing for graduates should be able to show that the test measures something job-relevant and does not systematically disadvantage particular groups. That evidence is something the vendor should be able to supply, and it deserves the same critical reading as the report above.
The short answer
The Criteria Corp report documents a mood among US hiring professionals, not a measured skills gap. What makes the figures useful is that they put words to an uncertainty many recruiters recognise. The right response to that uncertainty is not more testing but more precise testing, chosen on the basis of what the job requires and what a new graduate can realistically be expected to do on day one.
Source: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ai-skill-gaps-and-workplace-readiness-are-reshaping-hiring-criteria-corps-annual-benchmark-report-finds-302899613.html