Read on Twitter
Okay, to elaborate on my prior tweet about Federal tech leadership roles, particularly those of the Federal CIO, CTO (and CISO, and possibly more recently CDO - “D” as in data) I will give a primer from the “inside” and some observations. (One of a few tweets... so no 1 of X)
The Federal CIO was formerly the Administrator of e-Government, and the first was Karen Evans under Bush (44) created out of the E-Government Act of 2002 (which also had the first FISMA as a sub-component) and was housed, and still is, under the Office of Management and Budget.
The first Federal CTO in name, but not a statutory role (however the head of OSTP, Office of Science and Technology Policy) , was under Obama - first with Aneesh Chorpra, the Todd Park, & Megan Smith - Kratsios is now, but much diminished. Led “big idea and outreach” for tech.
That’s good, CTOs generally are the “big idea” and visionaries in orgs to set future direction - as should their role be in the Federal space, as OSTP drives technology policy as the government and how US tech should be applied to make America a leader which such.
The CIO, as in most private sector scenarios, are “run the business”, which includes applying policy, budget and management - which is why it’s surprisingly well placed under OMB. This basic “run the business” of government has been the most challenging part of the past 20 years.
Sadly, in the private sector these separations aren’t always there or aligned as such. Add in the Chief Data Officer and Chief Information Security Officer into the mix and this gets more complex financially and management-wise. Since there’s a lot of agencies & a lot of missions
Having been both a CTO and CIO in this space, they are also vastly different but also partners (as well with CDO and CISOs), and add the challenge of adopting and adapting to new tech, ways to apply and management, who ever has the top roles also needs to work in consort.
Budgeting has been the biggest challenge as it is not consistent and timely - which doesn’t work well for tech projects... it’s often “what can you do today” rather than “what can we do tomorrow” when it comes to planning & delivery. Congressional funding makes it more difficult
In many cases the structure of agencies make strategic tech delivery difficult, as each sub-part is individually funded and an agency CIO is often left negotiating for funding and cooperation among each branch for “enterprise” activities. This is why it’s hard to say...
“Well, this would be so much easier if X agency just went and used Y tool or service”... so Federal sales teams for tech have a bevy of people selling to each office, branch, section, and often project w/o a unifying strategy and policy from on top (OSTP/OMB).
The statutes in law often make favoritism illegal - like bulk buys strictly on cost - such as the FAR... so it plays into this structure. So, the cycle continues... or people find clever ways around it... legal or otherwise.
So back to who you need as a Federal CIO and CTO at the White House, or at least them and the staff. The CTO should be slightly academic... like “thinking about cutting edge” but be aware of current issues such as privacy, encryption, next-gen computing, etc.
The Federal CIO needs to know how to drive good business decisions within the Federal IT landscape (TBM was actually a “good” idea IMHO during this admin)... but also fairness and accountability during project execution (TechStats and Federal IT Dashboard).
The CIO and CTO need to work with transitioning news ideas from “concept to execution to management” within the Federal IT space... a good example was getting Agile and DevOps in to use, if imperfectly applied. Getting UX as a demand and US Web Design Standards in play.
The Federal CISO and CDO need to work together since business and government run on data, and data is also the most prized and useful asset of government... and they also need to plug into the CIO and CTO duo... but the current admin let that fall apart.
So, who do we get in?
I think we need to skip the Silicon Valley tech exec for Federal CIO, but maybe somebody who is a biz exec with workforce and budgeting skills. Doesn’t need to be techie here, but with a good head on applied tech.
I think we need to skip the Silicon Valley tech exec for Federal CIO, but maybe somebody who is a biz exec with workforce and budgeting skills. Doesn’t need to be techie here, but with a good head on applied tech.
The Federal CISO needs to lean on, but not defer to DHS. This is still and policy and management role, not SecOps... this is why CISA exists - and knows how to leverage them. The CISO needs to move the privacy and security policy needle further in Congress.
Finally, while we spent time with the Open Data Initiative under Obama... we need to continue to manage & transition to managing data as a useful & pliable asset and get agencies to use their own data smarter & find partners in civil society & private sector as a force multiplier
As I’ve found working on the ODI in 2014 and on our own data projects at HHS between divisions but also working on exchange with OPM and partners, we have a long way to go here, and we need help and should encourage it. We just need that spot to be codified and leveraged.
So, this is my peace on this for now, but also an explainer. I learned a lot in my time, both struggling, but also getting to do new things (the Federal Open Source Policy was one thing I wished I could have stayed on for at OMB - “default to open!”)
Cheers... also, gimme ideas!
Cheers... also, gimme ideas!
Oh, one last thing... the challenge is not only setting a goal and strategy and getting it done or changed every 4-8 years, but the challenge of the agency C-level techies having an average 18-24 month lifespan - that makes delivery difficult and demoralizes staff.
This is a workforce and pay issue which is an entirely different extended discussion for another time.
