Gen Z Sees Careers Without Borders—but AI Skills Rank Last

On August 27, Pebl published survey results showing that 82% of 1,022 U.S. Gen Z knowledge workers already saw themselves as part of a global workforce. In Pebl’s survey release, professional networks led the offered drivers of long-term career success at 28%, leadership and management experience followed at 26%, and AI skills ranked last at 11%.

The result is evidence about the priorities of this surveyed group, not a representative verdict from all Gen Z workers. It suggests that these young knowledge workers expect international experience, relationships and opportunities to lead to distinguish their careers more than an AI credential alone.

International work is being valued as career development

Respondents associated international work with capabilities that can carry into future roles. TechRadar’s August 28 coverage records that 73% expected international experience to broaden their perspective, 71% believed it would make them better leaders and 68% anticipated stronger problem-solving abilities.

The preferred model was not limited to permanent relocation. Forty-one percent envisioned careers spanning two or three countries or markets, while 64% expressed strong interest in temporary work opportunities in another geography. Those answers encompass materially different experiences, from a time-limited assignment to participation in a multinational team, so they should not be reduced to a single demand for working abroad.

The common attraction is exposure to unfamiliar markets, colleagues and operating assumptions. That helps explain why networking and leadership performed strongly in the career-priority question: cross-border work can create relationships and decision-making experience, provided employees receive meaningful responsibility rather than merely joining international calls.

AI ranked last only in a forced-priority comparison

The 11% result does not establish that respondents consider AI skills unimportant. It measures the share who selected AI skills as the single most valuable factor for long-term career success among the choices offered. The headline’s “last” therefore applies to that specific ranking, not to every skill a young worker might need.

The broader responses point to complementarity rather than rejection. A Learning News account of the findings says 78% believed AI would make human experiences such as working across countries and cultures more valuable.

One published figure concerning ethical AI requires caution: the release’s highlighted summary and main text give different percentages for respondents who would prefer an employer that understands AI’s effects on people and communities. Because the page is internally inconsistent, the precise share should not be treated as settled. The defensible conclusion is narrower: responsible use of AI appeared alongside, rather than in place of, respondents’ interest in human experience.

Three employer responses test different parts of the finding

The survey did not test workplace programs or measure their results. Employers can nevertheless use its claims as hypotheses, choosing an intervention according to the experience they intend to create:

• Global rotations: Best aligned with direct exposure to another market and its working context. The relevant test is whether participants later receive broader responsibilities, not simply whether an assignment was completed.
• Cross-border teams: Potentially available to more employees without relocation. Their value depends on junior workers gaining sponsors, decision rights and visible responsibility instead of passive meeting attendance.
• Responsible AI policies: Appropriate for building role-specific technical fluency while preserving human review and accountability. Governance can make AI use safer, but it does not itself produce international networks or leadership practice.

These approaches should not be treated as interchangeable benefits. A rotation offers immersion but may reach relatively few people; a distributed project can scale more broadly but provide shallow exposure; an AI policy governs technology without guaranteeing career development. Comparing participation, progression and retention across programs would show whether the survey’s stated preferences predict workplace behavior.

The sample sharply limits the generational claim

The online survey was conducted by Researchscape on Pebl’s behalf from July 6 through July 16, 2026. Its responses were not weighted, meaning the results were not adjusted to make the respondent pool reflect a broader population on relevant demographic characteristics.

The population was also restricted to U.S. Gen Z knowledge workers. The findings therefore cannot be generalized from this release alone to all members of Gen Z, young workers in non-knowledge occupations or employees in other countries. Online recruitment and the occupational screen may favor respondents for whom remote collaboration and international careers are comparatively plausible.

Pebl sells global employment services, giving the company a commercial interest in questions about borderless careers. Sponsorship does not negate the responses, but the published material does not provide enough detail about recruitment, demographic composition, question order or every response option to assess how sensitive the headline ranking is to the survey design.

What the evidence supports is a bounded finding: within this unweighted sample, global exposure, professional networks and leadership experience carried more perceived long-term value than selecting AI skills as the top career advantage. Representative research and observed outcomes from employer programs would be needed to determine whether that ordering holds across the wider Gen Z workforce.

Also read:

• Emotion Can Drive Sharing—But Relatable Content Needs More Than Feeling
• Scaling Global Content Without Borders: The Multilingual SEO Dilemma in 2026
• Geofencing Offers Four Marketing Benefits—But Consent Decides Their Value