Error messages in tech appointment process
A chief technology officer was supposedly a Government priority, but nothing’s happening and we are losing time in a fast-moving race.
Error webpages are the bane of every webmaster’s life. It’s a public showing of your dirty laundry to the world, with the extrapolation being that you don’t have your technical stuff together enough to deliver a requested webpage.
Last week, MBIE’s website was throwing a few HTTP error status pages, including the dreaded 503 error – which in normal speak means the service you have asked for isn’t available at present.
The page in question was the job description for the role of Government Chief Technology Officer (CTO), the position that Labour started championing early last year.
Ironically, the error message was technically correct – New Zealand does not have the services of a CTO, despite the effort and capital invested into the search to date.
I first heard the CTO role mooted by Rod Drury over a few beers in 2014 when he opened new premises in Wellington’s Market Lane. Drury was annoyed that the government engagement model in New Zealand only allowed tech companies to work reactively on government initiatives.
He reckoned a CTO could frame up the tech issues of the day, build a tech strategy that teased out our competitive advantage and be the interface between the private and public sector; a Peter Gluckman of the web, so to speak. But with hipper spectacles.
National looked into it and UnitedFuture leader Peter Dunne made some noises, but it went nowhere until Labour picked it up as an initiative flowing out of its 2016 Future of Work Commission.
This commission – apart from drawing together the thinkers that now largely constitute the current kitchen cabinet of the Government – reckoned a good CTO could help ensure New Zealanders had better access to technology and accelerate the use of technology in business.
It was unsurprising, then, to see a CTO initiative become part of their platform in 2017 and used as part of their campaign in the election campaign, with a promise to make this an early hire. It become part of their ‘‘100 day fast-track’’ but 365 days later things haven’t gone as smoothly as
The one part that everyone forgets is that this role has zero enforcement ability.
they would have liked.
The Government has now run two processes to appoint a New Zealand CTO – with 60 applicants in the first round and more than 100 in the second (myself included) – and still haven’t made an appointment.
Rumours persist that marketing entrepreneur Derek Handley has got the role, a suggestion that froze the waters of the private sector and acted as a catalyst for a yeasty social media outburst.
Punakaiki tech fund founder Lance Wiggs probably captured the mood of the moment in his tweet last week when he tagged Jacinda Ardern, Winston Peters and Megan Woods, suggesting: ‘‘Do your reference checks with the industry now.’’
I’ve never met Handley so won’t pass opinion, but the thing that bugs me most is that it’s still very unclear what the role is aimed at achieving. The official job description said it would drive our digital agenda but was light on deliverables.
More recently, former communications minister Clare Curran emphasised New Zealand’s comparatively high rate of digital exclusion (approximately 8 per cent of Kiwis can’t access the internet) and the importance of building equity with communities.
Unsuccessful candidate the first time round and tech evangelist Gnat Torkington penned a colourful summation of his take on The Spinoff last week. Torkington suggested the role is about five things – preventing budgetary blowouts, providing meaningful guidance to the civil service, being a trusted adviser to politicians, prototyping new technology and providing a bridge from the public to the private sector.
This last objective may actually be blown as an unintended consequence of the way the process was run. A lot of very senior private sector tech heads with impressive achievements put their hats in the ring, and the common message from many of them was how poor the communications were managed during the online video process and a lack of pastoral care. Whether it was MBIE or the Ministerial Advisory Panel who were behind this is unclear.
My interpretation of the job ahead is different again. It’s about putting together a game plan that would first and foremost look at economic levers. It feels to me that the Future of Work Commission needs to be dusted off and freshened up in a digital context – with a very tight brief to the incomer. A process that might help business confidence as well.
We need to get a house view of the future, our competitive advantage techwise and let the Government work proactively with the private sector to ensure we punch above our weight. But the brief needs to be tight – this is one person with $400,000 of salary, $100,000 of travel and a 12-month contract – it’s not a digital panacea nor a McKinsey army (thank God).
But the one part that everyone forgets is that this role has zero enforcement ability. The approach they take, and the plan they create, will be nothing if the private sector does not see value in the prize and competence in the delivery.
So the primary quality I’d be looking for in the person – apart from serious tech competence – is trust. If people don’t trust the person or their plan, then they aren’t going to sign up to it in 12 months’ time.
We will have lost another year in a race that’s only getting faster. And those error messages will be coming thicker and faster, not just on the MBIE website.
Mike ‘‘MOD’’ O’Donnell is a professional director, writer and adviser. His Twitter handle is @modsta and he doesn’t have hipster specs.