In recent years, as cyber threats multiply by the hour, the desperate need for cybersecurity talent has never been more acute. Industry reports paint a staggering picture: over 3.5 million cybersecurity positions remain unfilled globally, with the gap widening each year. Major data breaches make headlines weekly, critical infrastructure faces constant threats, and organizations scramble to protect themselves against increasingly sophisticated attacks.

Yet, paradoxically, as this talent crisis deepens, many companies continue to erect insurmountable barriers for newcomers trying to enter the field.

“Cybersecurity is not a field for entry-level candidates.”

This bewildering statement echoes across job boards, LinkedIn posts, and recruitment offices, creating perhaps the most self-defeating hiring paradigm in the tech industry today. While organizations sound alarm bells about their inability to staff security teams, they simultaneously shut the door on the very pipeline that could solve their problems. The math simply doesn’t add up: a chronic, industry-wide talent shortage existing alongside rigid, often absurd barriers to entry.

This contradiction isn’t just puzzling—it’s actively undermining the cybersecurity posture of organizations worldwide. As we’ll explore, these unrealistic expectations and flawed hiring strategies aren’t just inconvenient for job seekers; they represent an existential threat to the industry’s ability to meet growing security challenges in the years ahead.

The entry-level paradox

Image

The assertion that “cybersecurity isn’t for beginners” creates an impossible situation:

  • If seniors are the only viable hires, where do these seniors come from?
  • If juniors can’t enter the field, how does anyone ever become a senior?
  • If experience is required to enter the field, but the field itself is the only place to gain relevant experience, we’ve created a perfect catch-22.

This circular logic defies the natural career progression that exists in virtually every other professional field. Doctors start as medical students, lawyers as law clerks, and software developers as junior programmers. The notion that cybersecurity should somehow operate differently is both unrealistic and unsustainable.

The reality of skill acquisition

The idea that someone should gain experience in “totally disconnected fields” before entering cybersecurity is particularly problematic. While general IT or development experience can certainly provide valuable context, suggesting that the path to cybersecurity must detour through unrelated disciplines undermines the specialized knowledge required in this field.

Cybersecurity encompasses a vast array of specialized skills:

  • Threat intelligence
  • Penetration testing
  • Security architecture
  • Incident response
  • Compliance and risk management

Each of these domains requires dedicated study and practice. Expecting professionals to become experts in these areas without providing entry points is like expecting someone to become fluent in a language without ever allowing them to speak it.

The economic disconnect

Perhaps the most telling part of this hiring paradox is the economic contradiction it creates. Companies want:

  1. Senior-level expertise
  2. At junior-level compensation
  3. With immediate availability

Anyone with basic economic understanding can see why this equation doesn’t balance. Experienced professionals who have invested years developing specialized skills expect commensurate compensation. Companies unwilling to pay market rates for senior talent will find themselves in a perpetual hiring struggle.

According to industry surveys, the average salary for senior cybersecurity positions ranges from $100,000 to $160,000 depending on specialization and location. Yet many organizations balk at these figures while still expecting top-tier expertise.

As one colleague aptly put it: “Who spends 10 years gaining experience in this sector and then accepts low salaries? Rest assured, they won’t.”

When organizations refuse to invest in entry-level talent, they create a short-sighted approach that undermines the entire industry’s sustainability. The common practice of poaching seniors from other companies rather than developing internal talent leads to:

  • Inflated salaries at the senior level
  • A constantly revolving door of talent
  • Institutional knowledge gaps
  • An industry-wide failure to expand the talent pool

Consider what happens when the current generation of senior professionals retires.

If companies aren’t training their replacements now, who will fill those positions in 5-10 years?

Image

A better approach to talent development

Forward-thinking organizations are already recognizing that the “seniors only” approach is a losing strategy. Instead, they’re implementing multi-faceted approaches to talent development:

1. Structured entry programs

Companies like IBM, Cisco, Microsoft and Accenture have created specialized cybersecurity apprenticeship programs that provide structured pathways for newcomers. These programs acknowledge that even entry-level professionals can contribute meaningfully while learning on the job.

2. Internal talent development

Some organizations are looking inward, identifying employees with aptitude and interest in security from other IT roles and providing them with training and mentorship to transition. This approach leverages existing company knowledge while building security expertise.

3. Academia-industry partnerships

Collaborative programs between universities and corporations help ensure that academic curricula align with real-world needs, producing graduates who are better prepared for entry-level positions.

4. Certification support

Progressive employers are subsidizing certifications like CompTIA Security+, CEH, or CISSP for promising junior staff, creating clear advancement paths that benefit both the individual and the organization.

The diversity dimension

The “seniors only” mentality carries another significant downside: it perpetuates existing diversity problems in cybersecurity. When entry barriers are artificially high, they disproportionately impact underrepresented groups who may have had fewer opportunities to gain experience through traditional channels.

Image

By refusing to create entry points, organizations limit themselves to fishing in an already limited and homogeneous talent pool, missing the innovation and perspective that diverse teams bring to security challenges.

What would a more realistic and productive approach to cybersecurity hiring look like?

  1. Tiered team structures: Build security teams with varying experience levels, creating natural mentorship opportunities.

  2. Skills-based assessment: Evaluate candidates based on aptitude, problem-solving ability, and foundational knowledge rather than years of experience alone.

  3. Realistic job descriptions: Stop requiring 5+ years of experience for positions that could be performed by motivated juniors with proper mentorship.

  4. Competitive compensation strategies: Develop salary structures that reflect market realities while allowing for growth.

  5. Training commitments: Budget for ongoing professional development as a standard business expense.

Breaking the loop

The notion that “cybersecurity is not for entry-level professionals” is not just wrong—it’s actively harmful to an industry already struggling with talent shortages.

It represents a collective failure of imagination and investment that threatens the future security posture of organizations worldwide.

The companies that will succeed in building robust security teams are those that recognize the value of growing their own talent. By creating meaningful entry points, providing clear advancement paths, and offering competitive compensation at all levels, these organizations will not only address their immediate security needs but will contribute to the long-term health of the cybersecurity ecosystem.

The cybersecurity industry faces enough real threats without creating artificial barriers to its own sustainability. The time has come to rethink our approach to talent development and build a pipeline that will secure not just our systems, but the future of the profession itself.