In the federal U.S. government, there are two types of employees, roughly speaking. One is the career-long civil servant, dedicated to the mission of the agency, who, true to the cause, stays put no matter the political party in favor.
Then there are political appointees, those who tend to be replaced every election, especially in a system like the U.S.’s, when the political party changes power. These are more than gift jobs; however, those chosen for these roles are expected to support the winning party’s agenda.
Observers of the political process note that a successful government provides both types of workers: A bureaucrat will get the job done with ruthless efficiency as per the rule book, with disregard for political influences. But they can be slow to change, even when change is needed. The political appointees bring in fresh change with the will of the voters.
So! Is the role of the Chief Information Officer (CIO) to be an agent of change? Or the keeper of the law?
OPM Weighs in
Last week, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, a sort of chief HR office for the federal government, issued a memorandum that urged U.S. agencies to reclassify CIOs as political appointees, making the role less technical and more political in nature, noted U.S. government news site pub FedScoop.
The change is necessary for the times, OPM argues.
“A modern agency CIO is not a mere engineer, scientist or technocrat. He does not spend his days writing complex lines of code, setting up secure networks, or performing other ‘highly technical’ tasks. Instead, he crafts and effectuates policy, and sets and deploys his budget, based on his Administration’s priorities.” –U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
The office notes in the memo that the role of CIO is increasingly grappling with policy-based issues such as security and artificial intelligence, the approach for these issues may be vary with political party.
“The role of agency CIOs has changed dramatically in recent years,” the memo states. “No longer the station of impartial and apolitical technocrats, the modern agency CIO role demands policy-making and policy-determining capabilities across a range of controversial political topics.”
In OPM speak, the agency wants all federal agencies to redesignate the CIO role as “general,” rather than those marked as classified as Senior Executive Service and thus designated as “career reserved,” which makes them more difficult to replace.
OPM is recommending, rather than mandating, the change. Agencies have 45 days to report any changes in their CIO designations.
Political in Nature
The IT analyst firm Gartner defines CIO thusly:
The chief information officer (CIO) oversees the people, processes and technologies within a company’s IT organization to ensure they deliver outcomes that support the goals of the business.
With data becoming increasingly important in government operations, the CIO’s choice of agency funding can suddenly become political, and they face pressure to ensure that the funding falls under the President’s agenda. “Poor technology-procurement policies can endanger property and privacy rights,” OPM warned.
In a nod to the incoming administration, OPM pointed out diversity and inclusion programs as an example of a CIO-led initiative that “siphons” resources away from core agency missions.
Despite recent controversies around diversity practices, the issue of whether a CIO should support a political candidate has actually been much discussed over at least the past three decades, reported Jason Miller, executive editor of Federal News Network.
“Some agencies, such as the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs, have political CIOs because Congress wrote them into law. Other agencies, including the departments of Energy, Transportation and Housing and Urban Development, have moved the CIO position from career reserve to general when it suited their needs for a specific hire,” Miller wrote.
More Candidates From the Outside
OPM also hopes the re-classification will help bring in more qualified candidates from the outside for CIO roles. Finding talented technical help has long been a sore issue for government agencies, especially given its modest salaries compared to Silicon Valley.
As FedScoop points out, the current Presidential administration is also motivated to reduce the number of career civil servants, touting the move as increasing government efficiency.
Last month, the Administration confirmed Greg Barbaccia as the new federal chief information officer, operating out of the Office of Management and Budget. He was formerly the core operations lead of analysis software provider Palantir, as well as president of blockchain search engine provider Elementus.
So, in your organization, is the CIO an agent of change or the keeper of order?
The post US Moves To Designate Agency CIOs as Political Appointees appeared first on The New Stack.
Should a CIO be a political appointee? Or should they be lifelong bureaucrats immune from the political winds of change?