Information Technology Resources Board

IT Brain Drain Report

March 1998

We, the Information Technology Resources Board, an interagency group of senior information technology (IT) practitioners, were asked to look at the growing concern in industry and government over the diminishing pool of skilled IT workers. Specifically, this report shares our recommendations on how the government could address the loss of workers generally thought of as "managers of managers" and "managers of contracts."

We did not attempt, in this short report, to provide an academic thesis on the very broad and complex problem called "brain drain." We did, however, look closely at the issue as it pertains to the top levels in government and develop recommendations we hope will lead to specific, feasible actions. Our focus was on "How do we keep our current top IT executives and develop their successors?"

As you will see, some of our suggestions are reasonably easy to address and implement (one or two have been implemented since March 1998), while others require further discussion and debate. In short, we believe the brain drain problem facing the government is real and serious. We also believe, however, there are actions and solutions within the government’s reach that can facilitate the continuance of a highly skilled Federal executive work force.

Arnold Bresnick

Chair
Information Technology
Resources Board

Executive Summary

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) asked the Information Technology Resources Board (ITRB) to study the impact on the Federal government of the growing shortage of information technology (IT) professionals—the IT "brain drain." Specifically, OMB asked, "How does the government produce the next group of top IT executives?"

This report is in response to OMB’s request. It describes the factors that affect the pool of candidates for the top IT jobs in government and provides explicit actions addressing the recruitment, development, and retention of Federal executives.

The report recommendations basically fall into three action categories: implement new management initiatives, change policy and regulations, and change culture. They solicit a variety of possible responses, including actions by agencies, topical guidance to agencies, OMB directives, Executive orders, and revised laws and regulations:

Implement New Management Initiatives	Change Policy and Regulations	Change Culture
Seek common IT solutions across government	Increase rewards for performance at executive and mid-management levels	Make improvements in the workplace
Endorse and promote the CIO University	Permit reduced work schedules without penalties	Ensure widest possible competition
Encourage management development opportunities	Eliminate "time card"mentality	Adopt work/life programs
Use cross-government forums	Increase mobility into and out of government	Establish mandatory rotational programs
Reach out to professionals in other disciplines		Encourage greater use of existing financial incentives
Leverage existing executive development forums		Plan for succession to top jobs

The IT brain drain problem is real—and serious. For the government to be successful in delivering its mission outcomes in the future, it must be effective in retaining its top IT executives and competitive in recruiting the best candidates from outside the government.

This report describes feasible actions that the government can take to maintain a highly skilled corps of top IT executives and to lessen the impact of brain drain on the Federal environment.

  The Federal Workplace

  The Draw by the Private Sector

  The Development of Candidates for Senior IT Positions

  The Number of Candidates for Senior IT Positions

Conclusions

Recommendations

  Implement New Management Initiatives

  Change Policy and Regulations

  Change Culture

Summary

Appendix: ITRB Members and Staff

Today, it is difficult to pick up a trade journal or newspaper that does not contain an article on the growing shortage of employees to fill information technology jobs. Virginia Tech recently released a study showing that 346,000 computer programmer and systems analyst jobs are currently vacant in companies with 100 employees or more. The Labor Department estimates 95,000 new computer scientists, systems analysts, and programmers will be needed every year through the year 2005. The Information Technology Association of America states, "The shortage [in information technology workers] is a fundamental threat to the economic growth of the United States." ("Workers for Tech Jobs," The Washington Post, January 12, 1998)

The problem is not restricted to mainstream technical positions, however. In the January 1998 issue of Human Resources, the magazine addresses the diminishing pool of top technology managers. It states, "On the threshold of the new millennium, HR executives at the nation’s largest employers grapple with finding and cultivating the next generation of leaders." Although there have not been any studies, to our knowledge, that specifically address the problem in the context of the Federal workplace, we can assume it is at least as serious.

This report responds to OMB’s request for ideas relating to the diminishing pool of skilled IT managers and executives in the Federal government.

In its simplest form, the following diagram illustrates the brain drain problem:

Other than retirement (which is not addressed here), several major factors influence the pool of managers
and executives from which selections are made to the top IT jobs in government:

• the Federal workplace,
• the draw by the private sector,
• the development of candidates for senior IT positions, and
• the number of candidates for senior IT positions.

The Federal workplace environment significantly impacts the pool of skilled executives and managers positioned to advance to the top IT jobs in government. The climate, rules, processes, culture, attitudes, and morale of the work environment affect candidates for the pool by influencing their decision to continue Federal employment during the midpoints of their career. The same characteristics also affect individuals already in the pool by influencing their decision to stay and seek the top Federal jobs. All of these decisions—those made by mid-career employees and those made by the more senior executives—are occurring under the influence of growing private sector pressures to leave.

There are many general characteristics of the Federal workplace that have a negative impact on employees. These include a reluctance to make timely and difficult decisions, poorly defined decision processes, risk-averse attitudes, unclear motivators and incentives, poor communication, and the fact that public service is not valued. Others are more specific to the IT workplace environment and generally center on the perception that IT, and the IT professional, are not understood and valued. These influences, which are described in the following subsections, are important because they are having an effect on the work force at the same time employment opportunities abound in the private sector.

IT not valued—In many organizations, information technology is not valued as a core enabler of agency objectives. It is not viewed as a critical success factor. It is often treated as an administrative or infrastructure component, rather than a rich, integral resource for advancing and accomplishing agency mission objectives. Sometimes IT is thought of as being nothing more than the utility for day-to-day operations. On the other hand, in private industry, IT is viewed as a strategic competitive asset.

IT leadership not valued—Not only is the IT role misunderstood, but so is the IT leader. The IT leader is not valued and considered an "equal" partner among the business leaders in delivering mission performance. Consequently, he or she is often unable or unwilling to exercise appropriate leadership in the cultural environment of an agency. Additionally, the IT leader tends to be reactive—rather than proactive like his or her business colleague—in leveraging the potential benefits and contribution of IT.

Unclear responsibility for programs—Responsibility for the delivery of programs and mission outcomes is often divided across organizations, with no one individual accountable. Worse yet, when accountability is clear, the empowerment and resources needed are missing. In the simplest terms—frequently, there are no "champions" for the government’s most important programs and policies.

Unclear understanding of "success"—Federal officials are required to provide products and outcomes without a clear understanding of what constitutes success. The legislative language is often vague and leaves too much room for interpretation. An example is the requirement for an IT architecture. Agencies vary greatly in terms of their mission focus and the number and variety of their organizational components. Architectural success can be interpreted many ways, depending on the culture of the agency and perspective of the observer.

Skills not maintained—As more IT activities are contracted out, more IT professionals become contract managers. Over time, they lose their technical competence and expertise and become bored by what they consider to be less interesting work.

Lack of current technology—The government workplace implements new technology slowly. Lacking a profit incentive, the government is slow to justify the requirements for the latest in emerging technology. In contrast, high performing firms quickly admit that newly released and installed technology gives them the competitive edge.

Managing change—The Federal manager has difficulty in implementing technological advances in an environment where workplace changes are met with reluctance and resistance. A natural contention exists when emerging technology requires change while employee unions are focused on maintaining customary and usual work practices. Business constraints and delays occur when union locals negotiate separate agreements to implement the same or similar technology-driven innovation.

Lack of developmental opportunities—Although the Federal workplace is large and seems to offer many opportunities for advancement throughout the government, people become "stovepiped." Their advancement is often hindered because they have not been given the opportunities both within and outside the agency to develop new skills. One reason opportunities are withheld is because they are considered too valuable in their current jobs.

Demeaning work practices—The Federal employee is often subject to the perception that he or she cannot be trusted. Basic phone use, such as that to a weather service, is often restricted. Internet access, today’s richest resource tool, is often restricted for fear of abuse. Employees are micro-managed. Localized and limited problems can result in inappropriate wide-ranging solutions. In many workplaces, telecommuting is not allowed or encouraged because trust in the employees is lacking.