← All programs

Marketing

Including 455,670 postings from Fortune 500 career sites and 89,801 postings from small-employer job boards and 32,618 postings from US federal jobs, collected since 27 September 2026. Figures on this page are larger than the published ones and are not comparable with them.

How Marketing relates to the other programs

34,059 of the 794,739 postings in every geography in the last 90 days count toward Marketing (4.3%), the 4th largest of the 11 programs. 18,010 count toward it alone; 16,049 also count toward another program. 50.7% are AI-related, against 25.8% across all postings: the 3rd highest of the 11 programs with enough postings to say.

Strategic Management: 87% in commonBusiness Management: 84% in commonSales: 81% in commonFinance: 77% in commonHuman Resource Management: 74% in commonAccounting: 73% in commonGlobal Supply Chain Management: 65% in commonEntrepreneurial Management: 55% in commonInformation Systems: 80% in commonExperience Design and Management: 82% in commonMKTG in the middle; the other programs overlap it in proportion to what they share.

Marketing is the large circle. Each small circle overlaps it in proportion to how much of its work styles it shares with Marketing: the most alike program has 80% of its area inside, a program with half that similarity half as much, and one that shares nothing just touches. Around the ring, programs sit next to the ones they share most with. The number in each circle is the exact figure; every circle opens that program.

Most alike on work styles

  1. Strategic Management87% in common

    Cooperation · Initiative · Analytical Thinking · Innovation · Dependability

  2. Business Management84% in common

    Cooperation · Initiative · Analytical Thinking · Dependability · Stress Tolerance

  3. Experience Design and Management82% in common

    Cooperation · Innovation · Initiative · Analytical Thinking · Independence

  4. Sales81% in common

    Cooperation · Initiative · Dependability · Analytical Thinking · Innovation

  5. Information Systems80% in common

    Cooperation · Initiative · Analytical Thinking · Innovation · Independence

  6. Finance77% in common

    Cooperation · Initiative · Analytical Thinking · Dependability · Stress Tolerance

  7. Human Resource Management74% in common

    Cooperation · Initiative · Analytical Thinking · Dependability · Stress Tolerance

  8. Accounting73% in common

    Cooperation · Initiative · Analytical Thinking · Dependability · Stress Tolerance

  9. Global Supply Chain Management65% in common

    Cooperation · Analytical Thinking · Innovation · Dependability · Stress Tolerance

  10. Entrepreneurial Management55% in common

    Initiative · Cooperation · Innovation · Stress Tolerance · Independence

“In common” is the share of the two programs’ work styles mixes that they hold together: for each item, the smaller of its two shares, summed, over the larger, summed. Items shown are the ones both programs ask for most, each held by at least 20 postings in both. Last 90 days, every geography. A posting counts toward a program when the discipline classifier assigns it there (how postings are classified).

Where Marketing postings fall across the four quadrants

Each bar counts Marketing postings in one quadrant, not the whole quadrant. The filled part is how many of those are AI-related. The last figure on each row turns it round: how much of that whole quadrant of the labour market Marketing postings make up. Last 90 days, by real posting date. Each quadrant’s name opens it on the overview, across every program.

What the four quadrants are cut on. The capabilities a posting asks for, read from its description. A role naming three or more distinct engineering capabilities has builder depth; three or more business capabilities gives business depth. Both is Hybrid, neither is AI-thin. There are four because two yes-or-no tests cross, which is what makes them quadrants rather than a list. The threshold of three is the one the source analysis used, adopted rather than reinvented so the two stay comparable.

The 34,059 postings drawn here are this program’s share of the panel: postings carrying a real posting date from the last 90 days in every geography that the discipline classifier assigns to it. A posting can count toward more than one program. Quadrants with fewer than 20 postings are left out, and AI shares are withheld below 200.

What each quadrant asks for

Ranked by how far Business-deep AI sits from the other quadrants, not by how often the item appears. The bar is this region; the ticks are the others. An item everybody asks for tells you nothing about where you are.

Tools

Named software, languages and platforms. The fastest thing on this page to learn.

Partly definitional. Quadrants are cut on how many of these terms a posting names, so a quadrant leads on the terms that put it there. The ordering is still informative; the level is not a discovery.

  • Amazon Web Services (AWS)about 1 in 100 postings ask for this
    0.7%−12.4 points vs the other two
  • Pythonabout 1 in 100 postings ask for this
    0.9%−12.3 points vs the other three
  • Azureabout 1 in 100 postings ask for this
    0.9%−10.7 points vs the other two
  • Customer relationship management (CRM)about 20 in 100 postings ask for this
    20%+9.2 points vs the other two
  • JavaScriptfewer than 1 in 100 postings ask for this
    0.4%−5.7 points vs the other three
  • Tableauabout 3 in 100 postings ask for this
    2.6%−5.7 points vs the other quadrant
  • Google Cloud Platform (GCP)fewer than 1 in 100 postings ask for this
    0.1%−5.6 points vs the other two
  • Kubernetesfewer than 1 in 100 postings ask for this
    0.2%−5.5 points vs the other two

Shares are of postings in this region over the last 90 days, by real posting date, in the geography chosen above. These figures were fixed to the United States until 22 September 2026 and could not follow that choice; they can now.

Where these numbers come from

37,604 Marketing postings have been collected in all. The figures above use 34,059 of them: the last 90 days (34,059), and of those, the ones anywhere. Each bar is one source.

The sources ask for AI at very different rates because they were collected for different reasons, so the 50.7% AI share at the top of the page is a mix of them and moves with that mix. Compare sources side by side rather than reading the pooled figure as the market’s. How each source is collected, and why they are never pooled for the market figures, is under the four sub-corpora on the research page.

What this page cannot tell you yet

No employers from this program

None of the employers who actually hire your graduates have been named, so the panel can only describe firms that happen to post on the boards already collected. Named employers are resolved to their public job feed and collected directly.

Two things from you change all of the above. The job titles your graduates commonly take, and the employers who commonly hire them. Titles become candidate classifier rules; employers become collection targets, deduplicated across every program so the ones several of you name independently get resolved first.

Sign in to add them. Everything you enter is stored as a claim from your program, never merged into the posting evidence, and shown with your program named beside it.

How the panel is built · Methodology