Significant differences remain across the European labour market
The growth figures are impressive. In 2024, 4.9% of Dutch active job seekers used AI during their job search. By 2025, that figure had risen to 11.1%, more than doubling. Among job changers, usage went from 4.5% to 10.8%. These are not marginal shifts. This is a behavioural transformation, and a similar pace of growth is expected in 2026. We are eagerly awaiting the first figures of 2026 this summer.
Yet the Dutch growth curve tells only part of the story. When you place Intelligence Group’s data from 28 European countries side by side, a fundamentally different question emerges: why does Croatia perform so much better than Sweden and the Netherlands? And how do you explain that Italy, the heart of European culture and creativity, consistently brings up the rear?
The two overviews below shed light on the current situation, for active job seekers and for job changers separately. What immediately stands out: there are two clearly distinguishable groups of countries, and the dividing lines do not run along the expected axis of ‘wealthy digital Northern Europeans vs. the rest.’
The most surprising finding is how consistently the Balkan countries score highly. Croatia tops all of Europe for both active job seekers (13.5%) and job changers (12.9%). Slovenia follows with 10.5% and 11.2% respectively.
Part of the explanation lies in the structure of those labour markets. In Croatia and Slovenia, the share of highly educated people among job seekers is relatively high compared to the available supply of jobs at that level. AI then functions as a levelling tool: it gives candidates who have less access to strong professional networks a way to distinguish themselves. While Western European recruitment markets have for decades been dominated by LinkedIn, agencies and alumni networks, AI has simply been able to fill an earlier and larger gap. There is little legacy in job-seeking behaviour.
Italy ranks last among active job seekers with just 3.1%, a gap of more than ten percentage points behind leader Croatia. Among job changers (5.6%), Italy also falls well short of the European average of 8.5%.
This is striking for a country that is not lagging technologically and where youth unemployment is actually high, which you would expect to be a catalyst for experimental job-seeking behaviour. The explanation likely lies in the cultural architecture of the Italian labour market. Recruitment there runs strongly through personal networks and referrals. CVs circulate informally. In that model, AI as an orientation tool holds far less obvious value: after all, you are not searching for vacancies, you are being approached. For Italy, failing to keep pace with this development carries two important drawbacks. First, it will make it easier for talented young Italians to emigrate, and will accelerate that trend. Second, in a heavily ageing country, Italy is missing an important opportunity for social mobility and the creation of a more level playing field.
Romania (5.7% active, 4.7% job changers), Hungary and Austria complete the lower regions, each for their own reasons: lower digital maturity among older job seekers in Romania and Hungary, and a notably conservative recruitment culture in Austria.
Finland (7.5% active, just 4.8% job changers) and Norway (7.4% and 7.4% respectively) perform surprisingly average for countries that are internationally regarded as digital pioneers.
A paradox is likely at play here: in countries where the labour market infrastructure is already excellently digitalised, with good public job portals, efficient public services and mature LinkedIn usage, the added value of AI is less tangible. The ‘pain’ that AI resolves elsewhere exists to a lesser degree here. Those who already find jobs effortlessly through existing digital channels feel less urgency to experiment. These are, incidentally, precisely the countries where Intelligence Group is watching the 2026 data update with particular interest. The expectation, partly driven by LinkedIn’s underperformance and the growing number of unemployed, is that an accelerator effect could drive a significant catch-up.
The UK scores just 7.6% among active job seekers, but jumps to 12.6% among job changers, the second-highest score in all of Europe. This is a notable pattern: people who are already employed but want to make a move are using AI intensively. The high level of competition in the British labour market likely plays a role. If you already have a job but want to switch, the bar is high, and optimal preparation through AI is a logical investment.
Germany shows a more even profile: 11.1% active, 12.5% among job changers. That is a striking score for a country where the labour market and job orientation behaviour are fairly conservative compared to other Western European countries. Germans also have more reservations about privacy and American tech than, for example, the British and Dutch. The high score will therefore partly be driven by the poor state of the German labour market. This creates an opportunity for AI to accelerate the functioning of the German labour market, given the high adoption rate among job seekers.
The data makes one thing clear: candidates who use AI during their orientation are different from those who do not. They are better prepared, know their market value, have defined their skills profile more sharply, and ask better questions during job interviews. Recruiters who do not know how a candidate came to their information about the company and the role are falling behind, and would do well to familiarise themselves with the concept of GEO
A second implication: international recruitment strategies need to be recalibrated. A Croatian candidate applying via AI has a different expectation of the process than a Spanish candidate who was approached through their network. This calls for different communication, a different pace and a different flow of information throughout the candidate journey.
And third, specifically for the Dutch market: the sharpest rise is among job changers, from 4.5% to 10.8% in a single year. These are people who are currently employed but exploring their options. They are asking AI the questions they would previously have asked a trusted (agency) recruiter, through Indeed/LinkedIn or an informal networking conversation. As an employer or recruiter, you want to be visible in those answers, and that is a fundamentally different challenge from being present on a job board.
Intelligence Group’s data, drawn from more than 83,000 projected respondents across 28 countries, makes one thing definitively clear: the rapid rise of AI as a job search channel will fundamentally change the playing field in the labour market in the years ahead. At this early stage it is certainly not yet a uniform European phenomenon, but the expectation is that these differences will level out in the coming years. It is a fast, uneven and culturally determined shift, with, for now, surprising frontrunners, logical laggards and a few countries that are simply still discovering what they are missing.
For the recruitment industry, the question has long ceased to be whether AI is reshaping candidate behaviour. The question is whether you, as an agency, job board, employer or recruiter, understand what that candidate found through AI, and how you position yourself in relation to it.
