B. Analyzing the Mismatch
This finding combines NLx national postings and USAJOBS federal postings to ask how well O*NET's occupation-task assignments line up with observed task demand. The question is narrower than simple O*NET coverage: when postings support an off-list occupation-task pair, does that task look broadly general, shared within an occupational cluster, or concentrated enough to flag a candidate addition to a postings-informed O*NET?
The motivation is simple: O*NET is useful because it gives occupations a common task language, but its occupation-task lists are necessarily selective. Postings provide a second view of work as employers describe it. Where validated posting evidence repeatedly places an O*NET task outside its official occupation list, the result is not automatically an error, but it is evidence that a more permissive many-to-many task map may describe work better than a single official home.
The headline occupation denominator is the corrected one: all O*NET canonical tasks for the occupation plus validated off-list tasks. The off-O*NET share is a lower bound because the off-list numerator only includes pairs that were sampled and passed the two-model review.
What The Evidence Can And Cannot Say
The strongest evidence is a combination of four conditions: the task appears in postings for an occupation, the occupation-task pair passed two-model review, O*NET does not list the exact pair, and task spread points to broad generalization, sibling-cluster allocation, or concentrated review candidates.
The page does not claim every noncanonical row is an O*NET error. It identifies places where postings support a more permissive many-to-many task allocation than a single official home. Mixed-spread and low-volume tasks remain leads for review, not stable taxonomy recommendations.
Table 1. Review-retained off-list occupation-task pairs by evidence status
Off_list_pairs tab and sum to 13,893 validated off-list pairs. The table separates task-pair validation from occupation-coding reliability, so readers can see which candidate pairs are strongest before interpreting the task evidence.Median off-O*NET task share
Review-retained off-list pairs
Tasks with retained noncanonical homes
Specialized review candidates
Examples First
The case-study workbook separates two gates. Gate 1 asks whether the occupation coding looks reliable. Gate 2 asks whether the off-list task pair passed the two-model task review. The best candidate changes clear both gates; weaker examples are still useful, but should be read as audit leads.
O*NET now: 19 canonical tasks.
Postings-informed view: 35 validated off-list additions; 25 are specialized or cluster-shared candidates.
Why stronger: coding is reliable, and examples such as system troubleshooting support and software architecture have high RCA in NLx and USAJOBS.
Show task contrast
- Analyze user needs and software requirements to determine feasibility of design within time and cost constraints.
- Confer with systems analysts, engineers, programmers and others to design systems and obtain information on limitations and requirements.
- Provide technical guidance or support for the development or troubleshooting of systems.
- Develop system engineering, software engineering, system integration, or distributed system architectures.
- Analyze problems to develop solutions involving computer hardware and software.
O*NET now: 16 canonical tasks.
Postings-informed view: 20 validated off-list additions; 14 are specialized or cluster-shared candidates.
Why stronger: coding is reliable, and tasks such as sterilizing instruments and preparing patients are occupation-near work.
Show task contrast
- Prepare patient, sterilize or disinfect instruments, set up instrument trays, prepare materials, or assist dentist during dental procedures.
- Expose dental diagnostic x-rays.
- Record treatment information in patient records.
- Clean and sterilize instruments, equipment, or materials.
- Prepare patients for and assist with examinations or treatments.
- Clean, maintain, and sterilize instruments or equipment.
O*NET now: 30 canonical tasks.
Postings-informed view: 40 validated off-list additions; 13 are specialized or cluster-shared candidates.
Why cautious: this is substantively useful, but the LCA data used for occupational-coding validation do not include the firefighter occupation.
Show task contrast
- Rescue victims from burning buildings, accident sites, and water hazards.
- Dress with equipment such as fire-resistant clothing and breathing apparatus.
- Move toward the source of a fire, using knowledge of fire types, building materials, and property layout.
- Participate in firefighting efforts.
- Communicate fire details to superiors, subordinates, or interagency dispatch centers, using two-way radios.
- Conduct fire, safety, and sanitation inspections.
Occupation-Level Gap Share
This table asks where reviewed posting evidence adds the most to an occupation's official O*NET task list. "Gap share" means validated off-list tasks divided by official O*NET tasks plus validated off-list tasks. It is a lower-bound audit measure, not a complete occupational task profile.
Median gap share
75th percentile
Occupations above 50%
Review-retained off-list pairs
Task Buckets
Browse task-label examples
Workbook Downloads
Reader-facing examples with official O*NET tasks, postings-evidenced additions, coding verdicts, task-pair validation, RCA fields, and recommended candidate changes.
Standalone audit workbook with occupation summaries, off-list pair evidence, task summaries, coding reliability, dictionary, and audit fields. Use this as the public review artifact.