healthcarereimagined

By KIRSTEN ERRICKOCTOBER 13, 2022 02:56 PM ET

The report found that 46% of respondents would be more likely to use digital technology to access government services if the technology was easier to use.

People want an easy-to-use digital government customer service experience, according to an Accenture report released Wednesday, as more than half of respondents found it frustrating to access government services.

According to the report, people want their government service experiences to be simple, secure and have a human element. Specifically, respondents said it should be simple and easy for people to get the help they need, governments should strengthen security practices and there should be a balance between human and digital interactions.

In particular, the report found that most people complained about lengthy and confusing processes when it comes to public services. Only 36% of people said that government agency processes and interactions are intuitive and 41% said that government processes are clear and understandable. Notably, 46% of respondents said they would be more likely to use digital technology to access government services if the technology was easier to use.

“The best step forward to improve customer experiences is to establish simple and secure processes so people can get what they need on the first try,” Eyal Darmon, Accenture’s global public sector customer engagement lead, said in a press release. “If people—the customers—can quickly get easy questions answered via straightforward online, phone or in-person services, this frees up government workers to focus on more challenging customer service questions.”

For example, Accenture pointed to the importance of using everyday language. Specifically, “a U.S. state human services agency relabeled a link in its website navigation from ‘apply for unemployment insurance’ to ‘apply for unemployment payments.’ The switch to everyday language made it easier for people to access the service and begin the process of getting help.”

Respondents were also concerned about governments using their personal data, particularly about agencies’ abilities to secure their information and appropriately use it. For instance, only 49% of people surveyed are confident that agencies are using their data for the purpose they say they are using it. Additionally, at least 43% of people are more likely to use digital technology for government services if they were more confident in data security and privacy.

The report also looked at government workers’ perceptions of customer service. It found that about a third of government workers regularly receive cybersecurity and data security training.

“Continuous education and training on cybersecurity could help increase government workers’ and customers’ confidence in digital government services,” Darmon said. “Cyber-security should always be front-and-center as an ongoing priority.”

But usability also had an influence over whether respondents would share more of their data overall. Specifically, 53% of respondents stated that they would share more personal data with government agencies if it meant more convenient and efficient government services.

The survey found that most people interact with governments once or twice a year, so, according to Accenture, “there aren’t chances to ‘practice’ getting comfortable with interfaces or processes, so experiences should be intuitive to resolve issues the first time. Otherwise, people keep trying until they get what they need, which adds frustration for them and expense for agencies. This dynamic can also affect people’s confidence in government services.”

Additionally, the report highlighted an increasing desire for more digital interaction with respondents’ respective governments. However, according to the report, access can be a challenge for some people who lack high-speed internet at home. 

The survey provided five areas that governments can improve to help create better customer experiences, with both short- and long-term goals and plans. The first is to deploy digital tools with intention, conducting strategic practices like an experience assessment and a standard digital approach, while expanding offerings. According to the report, governments should also: invite public input for the development and design process; provide more workforce education and training; develop strong partnerships; and clearly communicate to build people’s confidence, awareness and understanding of available government programs and services, while working to expand access and reach. 

The report is based on survey findings from North America, Europe and Asia-Pacific. Accenture surveyed 5,500 consumers and 3,000 public workers from March to April of this year in Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Singapore, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States.

Article link: https://www.nextgov.com/it-modernization/2022/10/over-half-people-are-frustrated-digital-government-services-survey-finds/378395/

The Biden-Harris Administration has brought a relentless focus to improving the United States’ cyber defenses, building a comprehensive approach to “lock our digital doors” and take aggressive action to strengthen and safeguard our nation’s cybersecurity, including:

• Improving the cybersecurity of our critical infrastructure.  Much of our Nation’s critical infrastructure is owned and operated by the private sector.  The Administration has worked closely with key sectors – including transportation, banking, water, and healthcare – to help stakeholders understand cyber threats to critical systems and adopt minimum cybersecurity standards.  This includes the introduction of multiple performance-based directives by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to increase cybersecurity resilience for the pipeline and rail sectors, as well as a measure on cyber requirements for the aviation sector. Through the President’s National Security Memorandum 8 on Improving Cybersecurity for Critical Infrastructure Control Systems, we are issuing cybersecurity performance goals that will provide a baseline to drive investment toward the most important security outcomes.  We will continue to work with critical infrastructure owners and operators, sector by sector, to accelerate rapid cybersecurity and resilience improvements and proactive measures.
• Ensuring new infrastructure is smart and secure.  President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is an investment to modernize and strengthen our Nation’s infrastructure.  The Administration is ensuring that these projects, such as expanding the Nation’s network of electric-vehicle charging stations, are built to endure, meeting modern standards of safety and security, which includes cyber protections.  Investments in digital security through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) will also bring high-speed internet to underserved parts of the country, bridging the digital divide as well. Also the BIL, the Administration launched a first-of-its-kind cybersecurity grant program specifically for state, local, and territorial (SLT) governments across the country. The State and Local Cybersecurity Grant Program will provide $1 billion in funding to SLT partners over four years, with $185 million available for fiscal year 2022, to support SLT efforts to address cyber risk to their information systems and critical infrastructure.
• Strengthening the Federal Government’s cybersecurity requirements, and raising the bar through the purchasing power of government.  Through the President’s Executive Order on Improving the Nation’s Cybersecurity, issued in May 2021, President Biden raised the bar for all Federal Government systems by requiring impactful cybersecurity steps, such as multifactor authentication.  The Administration also issued a strategy for Federal zero trust architecture implementation, as well as budget guidance to ensure that Federal agencies align resources to our cybersecurity goals. We are also harnessing the purchasing power of the Federal Government to improve the cybersecurity of products for the first time, by requiring security features in all software purchased by the Federal Government, which improves security for all Americans.
• Countering ransomware attacks to protect Americans online.  In 2021, the Administration established the International Counter-Ransomware Initiative (CRI), bringing together partners from around the globe to address the scourge of ransomware.  The White House will host international partners October 31-November 1 to accelerate and broaden this joint work.  This group has raised collective resilience, engaged the private sector, and disrupted criminal actors and their infrastructure.  The United States has made it harder for criminals to move illicit money, sanction a series of cryptocurrency mixers used regularly by ransomware actors to collect and “clean” their illicit earnings.  A number of cyber criminals have also been successfully extradited to the United States to face justice for these crimes.
• Working with allies and partners to deliver a more secure cyberspace.  In addition to launching the International Counter Ransomware Initiative, the Administration has established cyber dialogues with a breadth of allies and partners to build collective cybersecurity, formulate coordinated response, and develop cyber deterrence.  We are taking this work to our most vital alliances – for example, establishing a new virtual rapid response mechanism at NATO to ensure Allies can effectively and efficiently offer each other support in response to cyber incidents.
• Imposing costs on and strengthening our security against malicious actors. The Biden-Harris Administration has not hesitated to respond forcefully to malicious cyber actors when their actions threaten American or our partner’s interests.  In April of 2021, we sanctioned Russian cyber actors affiliated with the Russian intelligence services in response to the SolarWinds attack.  We worked with allies and partners to attribute a destructive hack of the Viasat system at the beginning of Russia’s war in Ukraine. 
• Implementing internationally accepted cyber norms.  The Administration is committed to ensuring internationally negotiated norms are implemented to establish cyber “rules of the road.” More recently, we worked with international partners to call out Iran’s counter-normative attack on Albanian government systems and impose costs on Tehran for this act.
• Developing a new label to help Americans know their devices are secure. This month, we will bring together companies, associations and government partners to discuss the development of a label for Internet of Things (IoT) devices so that Americans can easily recognize which devices meet the highest cybersecurity standards to protect against hacking and other cyber vulnerabilities.  By developing and rolling out a common label for products that meet by U.S. Government standards and are tested by vetted and approved entities, we will help American consumers easily identify secure tech to bring into their homes.  We are starting with some of the most common, and often most at-risk, technologies — routers and home cameras — to deliver the most impact, most quickly.
• Building the Nation’s cyber workforce and strengthening cyber education.  The White House hosted a National Cyber Workforce and Education Summit, bringing together leaders from government and from across the cyber community. At the Summit, the Administration announced a 120-Day Cybersecurity Apprenticeship Sprint to help provide skills-based pathways into cyber jobs. With momentum from the Summit, the Administration continues to work with partners throughout society on building our Nation’s cyber workforce, improving skills-based pathways to good-paying cyber jobs, educating Americans so that they have the skills to thrive in our increasingly digital society, and improving diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) in the cyber field.
• Protecting the future – from online commerce to national secrets — by developing quantum-resistant encryption.  We all rely on encryption to help protect our data from compromise or theft by malicious actors.  Advancements in quantum computing threaten that encryption, so this summer the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) announced four new encryption algorithms that will become part of NIST’s post-quantum cryptographic standard, expected to be finalized in about two years.  These algorithms are the first group of encryption tools that are designed to withstand the assault of a future quantum computer, which could potentially crack the security used to protect privacy in the digital systems we rely on every day, such as online banking and email software.
• Developing our technological edge through the National Quantum Initiative and issuance of National Security Memorandum-10 (NSM-10) on Promoting United States Leadership in Quantum Computing While Mitigating Risks to Vulnerable Cryptographic Systems. This initiative has more than doubled the United States Government’s research and development (R&D) investment in quantum technology, creating new research centers and workforce development programs across the country. NSM-10 prioritizes U.S. leadership in quantum technologies by advancing R&D efforts, forging critical partnerships, expanding the workforce, and investing in critical infrastructure; will move the Nation to quantum-resistant cryptography; and protects our investments, companies, and intellectual property as this technology develops so that the United States and our allies can benefit from this new field’s advances without being harmed by those who would use it against us.

Article link: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/10/11/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-delivers-on-strengthening-americas-cybersecurity/

• Kerry Roberts Gibson,
• Kate O’Leary,
• Joseph R. Weintraub

January 23, 2020

Summary.   

Most companies run some kind of employee-recognition programs, but often they fall flat, wasting resources. Many become just another box for managers to check or are seen as elite opportunities for a favored few, leaving the rest of the workforce feeling left out. Meanwhile, a lot of individual managers also fail to adequately express appreciation, mistakenly assuming that reports know how they feel or struggling to balance gratitude with developmental feedback. In focus groups and interviews, however, employees reveal that making them feel valued and recognized isn’t all that complicated: It mostly comes down to a lot of small, commonsense practices.

Imagine this scenario: An employee named Rowen arrives at work on his 10-year anniversary and finds a gift card with a sticky note on his desk. The note is from his manager, acknowledging his anniversary. Realizing it didn’t even include a thank-you or a congratulations, Rowen rolls his eyes.

While most companies run employee-recognition programs of some sort, all too often they produce reactions like Rowen’s. Instead of giving people a meaningful sense of appreciation, they become just another box for managers to check and are completely disconnected from employees’ accomplishments. Some companies try to make programs more relevant by giving specific awards to individuals who’ve, say, created and led an important new initiative, “embodied” the organization’s values in their behavior, or had a significant impact. Yet that approach has problems too: Awards can be seen as an elite opportunity for a chosen few — and leave the majority of the workforce feeling left out and overlooked.

If managers could make a far broader group of employees feel appreciated, the benefits would be considerable. Adam Grant and Francesca Gino have found that when people experience gratitude from their manager, they’re more productive. Another researcherrecently found that teams perform tasks better when their members believe that their colleagues respect and appreciate them.

But in our combined 50-plus years of working to improve organizations, we’ve observed that many managers struggle to make employees feel that their talents and contributions are noticed and valued. To explore this problem, we recently took a deep dive within an organization to see how organizational efforts to show appreciation and gratitude were perceived. In that project we engaged with both employees and managers through focus groups, survey questions, and learning sessions. And what we discovered was that even though bosses feel it’s challenging to show their staff appreciation, the employees think it’s actually pretty simple.

The Gap Between Managers and Employees

Our discussions surfaced notable gaps between managers’ and employees’ perceptions. First, there was a stark difference between how much managers appreciated employees and how appreciated employees felt. We speculate that the illusion oftransparency, or people’s tendency to overestimate how visible their emotions are to others, explains this: Managers incorrectly assumed employees knew how they felt about them.

Second, many managers reported that communicating appreciation seemed really complicated. Some had trouble balancing it with developmental feedback and feared sending mixed messages to employees. Some were concerned that their efforts to offer appreciation to all employees would be routinized and seen as impersonal and meaningless. Employees, on the other hand, did not see this as a complex task and quickly and clearly articulated the precise ways managers could effectively express appreciation. Here’s what they told us managers needed to do:

1. Touch base early and often.While regularly taking time to say hello to employees and check in with them might seem like an unnecessary drain on your productivity, these interactions are actually valuable points of connection for your employees (and for you). They prevent your staff from feeling invisible. One of the employees in our focus groups told us that simply hearing “Good morning” or “How are you?” from his department manager would have been as meaningful as formal recognition. If you create routines that allow your employees to share stories with you about what they’re doing or working on, you can make them feel “known” by you — and stay in the loop on what’s happening within your organization.

2. Give balanced feedback. Employees want to know both what they’re doing well and where they can improve. In our discussions they reported time and again that receiving feedback — positive and developmental — was one of the key things that made them feel valued. As one employee explained, receiving praise from her manager was meaningful, but because she never got improvement-oriented suggestions, she questioned how valid the positive feedback was. Meanwhile, some employees who received only critical feedback seemed to give up, because they felt they could never do anything right.

The trick is to avoid giving both types of feedback at once. When managers try the common sandwich technique, stuffing negative feedback between two layers of positive feedback, employees just get confused. In our experience, the people who needed the developmental feedback most tended to only hear the positive things their manager said, and the people who performed well left remembering more of the negative comments. So be sure to clearly separate out the positive feedback from the developmental feedback.

3. Address growth opportunities. Employees want to know what the future holds for their careers. When managers take time to explicitly discuss growth potential or provide opportunities and “stretch” assignments, employees interpret it as evidence that they’re valued. Conversely, when managers neglect to address people’s development, employees take it as a sign that they are not.One employee told us, “My manager is constantly recognizing my work, and I know that she sees that I go over and above. The issue is that she doesn’t fight to get me new and greater opportunities.”

4. Offer flexibility. Whether managers gave people the option to work remotely or even simply suggested someone come in late the day after working extra hours, employees were quick to interpret it as an important signal of trust and appreciation. One employee told us that he felt the flexible work schedule his manager offered him was “a huge recognition.”

5. Make it a habit. Simply taking a few minutes to tell your employee specifically what you value about their contributions can have a tremendous impact. Try to build it into your regular routines, perhaps by spending the first 15 minutes of your week writing a personal thank-you note or starting your team meetings with shout-outs briefly acknowledging accomplishments of individual team members. The range of options are almost limitless. Some managers we spoke to gave food and gift cards as tangible expressions of their appreciation; others made it a point to visit with each of their reports daily. The idea isn’t to create an automatic system for thanking employees, however; it’s more about giving yourself permission to express your appreciation in a way that feels natural to you.

 Mistakes to Avoid 

Employees were equally clear about the ways in which managers communicated a lack of appreciation for them. Here are some common things managers get wrong:

1. Expressions of gratitude that are inauthentic or sweeping generalizations. Appreciation needs to be specific and genuine. While employees were enthusiastic about the variety of ways in which gratitude can be expressed, they were not moved by empty or offhanded gestures. There’s a big difference between yelling a thank-you on your way out the door versus sitting down with someone to describe the things you value about their work and its positive effect on the team or organization.

Meaningful expressions of appreciation were often described as timely, relevant, and sincere, and expressions that come off as hollow may actually be worse than no thanks at all. Managers also need to tread carefully when recognizing everyone on a team. Sometimes a group’s performance is not a reflection of equal contributions from all its members, and you run the risk of alienating high performers if everyone receives the same recognition.

2. Neglecting standard company procedures. Many busy managers feel that procedures like annual reviews, quarterly check-ins, and nominating employees for awards are a waste of time. But to employees, they’re important milestones that provide clues about their progress and performance. When a manager skips them, employees often infer that they, not the procedure, are what the manager doesn’t value. If you’re going to deviate from the organization’s rulebook, at the very least you need to be explicit with your employees about why, or they might conclude that your inaction is a statement about them.

3. Letting employees feel isolated from coworkers or the larger organization. For managers, it’s much easier to see how the contributions of each person fit with the work of others, but employees often lack that insight. When managers highlight how employees use one another’s work within their department or across others, it sets the stage for appreciation to spread throughout the organization.

4. Sudden or unexplained shifts in your appreciation practices. If you haven’t been focused on showing your employees appreciation, don’t overcompensate for it; chances are, they’ll see your efforts as insincere. Instead, let them know that you’re working on developing your gratitude skills as a leader. Take time to ask how they’d like to be recognized. Some may enjoy being thanked publicly, while others will bristle at the idea. The key is to know your employees’ individual preferences.

Making Appreciation Easy and Contagious

The best part of appreciation is that it’s free and doesn’t consume a lot of time. Anyone at any level can offer appreciation. It can be directed toward an employee, a colleague, or a boss. But when leaders get involved in the effort, a culture of appreciation spreads more quickly.

One thing that helps is getting together with other managers to discuss gratitude strategies that have worked well (or haven’t). If you’re a manager, consider partnering with one or more peers to exchange ideas and create accountability for your efforts.

At the end of the day, building a culture of appreciation comes down mostly to a lot of small commonsense practices: Not taking your people for granted. Remembering to say thank-you in a personal and sincere way. Making it clear that you’re interested in your employees’ growth and in them as individuals.

Start by expressing more gratitude to those around you and see what happens. You might be surprised at what a big difference the little things can make.

Article link: https://hbr.org/2020/01/the-little-things-that-make-employees-feel-appreciated?

• Kerry Roberts Gibson is an assistant professor in the Management Division at Babson College.
• Kate O’Leary is the director of compensation, rewards, and client engagement in the Office of Human Resources at Babson College.  
• Joseph R. Weintraub is professor of management at Babson College, where he is the founder and director of the Babson Coaching for Leadership and Teamwork Program. He is a coauthor of The Coaching Manager: Developing Top Talent in Business and The Coaching Organization: A Strategy for Developing Leaders.

GAO-22-104393 Published: Sep 29, 2022. Publicly Released: Sep 29, 2022.

Fast Facts

In 2017, the government began implementing the Technology Business Management framework to help federal agencies better manage their IT resources.

This framework includes a standard set of categories that agencies are required to use in their annual IT budget requests. These categories group related IT expenses together, which could provide greater insight into the costs and values of IT resources. It could also enable government-wide comparisons of IT spending.

However, we found that OMB currently requires agencies to only implement half of this framework. We recommendedthat OMB require agencies to implement the full framework.

Skip to HighlightsHighlights

What GAO Found

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and General Services Administration (GSA) have taken steps to lead government-wide Technology Business Management adoption, but progress and results are limited.

• OMB’s initial 2017 plans for government-wide adoption required agencies to report IT spending using categories in the first two layers. OMB continued to require reporting of these two layers in subsequent plans. However, 5 years after establishing initial plans, OMB had not expanded on requirements to include the rest of the taxonomy—the categories in layers 3 and 4, and subcategories for all layers (see figure).

Extent That the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Plans Addressed Elements of the Technology Business Management Taxonomy Version 3.0

• OMB and GSA assisted agency efforts to implement the Technology Business Management framework by, for example, developing implementation guidance and a maturity model assessment tool. However, OMB and GSA have not assessed agency maturity. Further, they have not analyzed the quality of agencies’ data reported in the first two layers.
• OMB and GSA released agency-reported data on the federal government’s IT Dashboard (layers 1 and 2), but did not disclose that about $31 billion in fiscal year 2021 investments were excluded. Further, they have not analyzed inconsistencies in fiscal year 2022 data, or addressed use of benchmarking that would enable spending comparisons to organizations of similar size or mission.

OMB and GSA officials maintain that Technology Business Management implementation continues to be a priority. Nevertheless, until OMB establishes documented plans and agency expectations for the remainder of the taxonomy, uncertainty will cloud agency efforts. Further, the continuing absence of OMB direction could prevent the federal government from fully achieving intended benefits such as optimizing IT spending.

Why GAO Did This Study

The government has faced longstanding challenges in IT management and spending transparency. In 2017, OMB announced its intention to improve insights into IT spending through government-wide adoption of the Technology Business Management Council’s framework.

This framework provides a standard taxonomy that is organized into four layers (cost pools, IT towers, products and services, and business units and capabilities) intended to show an organization’s total IT spending from different perspectives. These four layers are comprised of spending categories and subcategories.

GAO was asked to report on Technology Business Management implementation. GAO’s objective was to identify progress OMB and GSA have made in the government-wide adoption effort. To do so, GAO analyzed and compared plans against relevant criteria, such as Technology Business Management Council guidance. It also analyzed data, as reported by agencies for fiscal years 2021 and 2022, and interviewed relevant officials.

Skip to Recommendations

Recommendations

GAO is making seven recommendations to OMB and GSA, including establishing requirements for completing the remainder of the taxonomy, assessing maturity of agencies’ implementation, and addressing benchmarking use. As discussed in the report, GAO incorporated suggested OMB and GSA revisions for two of the seven recommendations; the agencies had no comments on the remaining five.

Recommendations for Executive Action

Office of Management and Budget The Director of OMB should direct the Federal CIO to establish plans and time frames for government-wide TBM adoption that address the remaining elements of the taxonomy (third layer, fourth layer, and subcategories). (Recommendation 1) 

Open

When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.Office of Management and Budget The Director of OMB should direct the Office of Federal Financial Management and Budget Review Division to work with GSA’s TBM program management office to determine appropriate next steps for updating budget object classification codes to better align agencies’ financial management systems with the TBM taxonomy. (Recommendation 2) 

Open

When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.Office of Management and Budget The Director of OMB should direct the Federal CIO to work with GSA to establish an approach for assessing the maturity of agencies’ TBM implementation. (Recommendation 3) 

Open

When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.Office of Management and Budget The Director of OMB should direct the Federal CIO to require all agencies to complete and submit the TBM maturity model assessment tool to OMB and GSA. (Recommendation 4) 

Open

When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.Office of Management and Budget The Director of OMB should direct the Federal CIO to ensure that known limitations in the TBM data for fiscal year 2021 are publicly disclosed on the IT Dashboard. (Recommendation 5) 

Open

When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.Office of Management and Budget The Director of OMB should direct the Federal CIO to analyze inconsistencies in agency-reported TBM data to determine why agencies are reporting differences between their TBM and IT portfolio spending data. (Recommendation 6) 

Open

When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.General Services Administration The Administrator of General Services should direct the Office of Government-wide Policy’s Director of IT Data Transparency to ensure that TBM benchmarking functionality is developed for the IT Dashboard. (Recommendation 7) 

Open

When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

SEE ALL 7 RECOMMENDATIONS

Highlights Page (1 page)

Full Report

Full Report (37 pages)

Accessible PDF (42 pages)

Article link: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-22-104393

By KIRSTEN ERRICKSEPTEMBER 30, 2022

The Government Accountability Office report found that agencies failed to disclose approximately $31 billion in fiscal year 2021 investments under the two layers of the Technology Business Management framework that were required.

The Office of Management and Budget and General Services Administration have taken steps to implement and facilitate governmentwide adoption of the Technology Business Management framework, however, more work could be done to further this effort, according to a Government Accountability Office report released Thursday.

The government began to implement the Technology Business Management framework in 2017 to help agencies manage their IT resources. The framework is an accounting standard for how agencies spend their budgets on IT. It is organized into four layers—and categories and subcategories within those layers—that are designed to show an organization’s total IT spending from different angles: cost, consumption and performance. TBM includes standard categories that agencies must use in their annual IT budget requests. These categories group related IT expenses together to allow for more insight into the cost and values of IT resources and allow for governmentwide IT spending comparisons. 

The government’s TBM policy currently only requires agencies to report IT spending in two of the four layers: cost pools and IT towers. As a result, GAO stated that “OMB currently requires agencies to implement half of this framework,” despite OMB launching the governmentwide adoption of the Technology Business Management Council’s framework just over five years ago.

GAO noted that agencies are currently not required to include the remaining two layers—products and services, and business units and capabilities—as well as the subcategories in each of the four layers. 

The watchdog added that while OMB and GSA initially helped agencies implement TBM, they have not performed an agency maturity assessment on these efforts, nor have they analyzed the quality of the currently reported data. GAO also found that, although OMB and GSA released agency data for layers 1 and 2, they failed to disclose that approximately $31 billion in fiscal year 2021 investments were not included. OMB and GSA have also not analyzed inconsistencies in fiscal year 2022 data or addressed benchmarking to allow for spending comparisons between similar organizations by either size or mission.

“OMB and GSA officials maintain that Technology Business Management implementation continues to be a priority,” GAO said. “Nevertheless, until OMB establishes documented plans and agency expectations for the remainder of the taxonomy, uncertainty will cloud agency efforts.” 

GAO made seven recommendations to OMB and GSA. 

The watchdog recommended that OMB direct the federal chief information officer to: 

• Create plans and a time frame for governmentwide TBM adoption for the remaining elements of the framework.
• Work with GSA to build a maturity assessment of agencies’ implementation of TBM.
• Require agencies to submit complete TBM maturity model assessments to OMB and GSA.
• Publicly disclose known limitations in TBM data for fiscal year 2021 on the IT dashboard.
• Analyze agency-reported TBM data discrepancies with IT portfolio spending data. 

Additionally, GAO recommended that OMB’s Office of Federal Financial Management and its Budget Review Division work with GSA’s TBM program management office to determine the proper next steps for updating budget object classification codes in a way that better aligns agencies’ financial management systems with the classification of TBM. 

GAO also recommended that GSA instruct the director of IT data transparency at the Office of Governmentwide Policy to develop TBM benchmarking functions for the IT Dashboard.

Article link: https://www.nextgov.com/it-modernization/2022/09/it-spend-reporting-requirements-still-stuck-halfway-point-watchdog-finds/377916/

• Emma Seppälä
• Kim Cameron

December 01, 2015

Too many companies bet on having a cut-throat, high-pressure, take-no-prisoners culture to drive their financial success.

But a large and growing body of research on positive organizational psychology demonstrates that not only is a cut-throat environment harmful to productivity over time, but that a positive environment will lead to dramatic benefits for employers, employees, and the bottom line.

Although there’s an assumption that stress and pressure push employees to perform more, better, and faster, what cutthroat organizations fail to recognize is the hidden costs incurred.

First, health care expenditures at high-pressure companies are nearly 50% greater than at other organizations. The American Psychological Association estimates that more than $500 billion is siphoned off from the U.S. economy because of workplace stress, and 550 million workdays are lost each year due to stress on the job. Sixty percent to 80% of workplace accidents are attributed to stress, and it’s estimated that more than 80% of doctor visits are due to stress. Workplace stress has been linked to health problems ranging from metabolic syndrome to cardiovascular disease and mortality.

The stress of belonging to hierarchies itself is linked to disease and death. One study showed that, the lower someone’s rank in a hierarchy, the higher their chances of cardiovascular disease and death from heart attacks. In a large-scale study of over 3,000 employees conducted by Anna Nyberg at the Karolinska Institute, results showed a strong link between leadership behavior and heart disease in employees. Stress-producing bosses are literally bad for the heart.

INSIGHT CENTER

• How to Be a Company That Employees LoveIt takes a careful mix of mission, management, and culture.

Second is the cost of disengagement. While a cut-throat environment and a culture of fear can ensure engagement (and sometimes even excitement) for some time, research suggests that the inevitable stress it creates will likely lead to disengagement over the long term. Engagement in work — which is associated with feeling valued, secure, supported, and respected — is generally negatively associated with a high-stress, cut-throat culture.

And disengagement is costly. In studies by the Queens School of Business and by the Gallup Organization, disengaged workers had 37% higher absenteeism, 49% more accidents, and 60% more errors and defects. In organizations with low employee engagement scores, they experienced 18% lower productivity, 16% lower profitability, 37% lower job growth, and 65% lower share price over time. Importantly, businesses with highly engaged employees enjoyed 100% more job applications.

Lack of loyalty is a third cost. Research shows that workplace stress leads to an increase of almost 50% in voluntary turnover. People go on the job market, decline promotions, or resign. And the turnover costs associated with recruiting, training, lowered productivity, lost expertise, and so forth, are significant. The Center for American Progress estimatesthat replacing a single employee costs approximately 20% of that employee’s salary.

For these reasons, many companies have established a wide variety of perks from working from home to office gyms. However, these companies still fail to take into account the research. A Gallup poll showed that, even when workplaces offered benefits such as flextime and work-from-home opportunities, engagement predicted wellbeing above and beyond anything else. Employees prefer workplace wellbeing to material benefits.

Wellbeing comes from one place, and one place only — a positive culture.

Creating a positive and healthy culture for your team rests on a few major principles. Our own research (see here and here) on the qualities of a positive workplace culture boils down to six essential characteristics:

• Caring for, being interested in, and maintaining responsibility for colleagues as friends.
• Providing support for one another, including offering kindness and compassion when others are struggling.
• Avoiding blame and forgive mistakes.
• Inspiring one another at work.
• Emphasizing the meaningfulness of the work.
• Treating one another with respect, gratitude, trust, and integrity.

As a boss, how can you foster these principles? The research points to four steps to try:

1. Foster social connections. A large number of empirical studies confirm that positive social connections at work produce highly desirable results. For example, people get sick less often, recover twice as fast from surgery, experience less depression, learn faster and remember longer, tolerate pain and discomfort better, display more mental acuity, and perform better on the job. Conversely, research by Sarah Pressman at the University of California, Irvine, found that the probability of dying early is 20% higher for obese people, 30% higher for excessive drinkers, 50% higher for smokers, but a whopping 70% higher for people with poor social relationships. Toxic, stress-filled workplaces affect social relationships and, consequently, life expectancy.

2. Show empathy. As a boss, you have a huge impact on how your employees feel. A telling brain-imaging study found that, when employees recalled a boss that had been unkind or un-empathic, they showed increased activation in areas of the brain associated with avoidance and negative emotion while the opposite was true when they recalled an empathic boss. Moreover, Jane Dutton and her colleagues in the CompassionLab at the University of Michigan suggest that leaders who demonstrate compassion toward employees foster individual and collective resilience in challenging times. 

3. Go out of your way to help.Ever had a manager or mentor who took a lot of trouble to help you when he or she did not have to? Chances are you have remained loyal to that person to this day.  Jonathan Haidt at New York University’s Stern School of Business shows in his research that when leaders are not just fair but self-sacrificing, their employees are actually moved and inspired to become more loyal and committed themselves. As a consequence, they are more likely to go out of their way to be helpful and friendly to other employees, thus creating a self-reinforcing cycle. Daan Van Knippenberg of Rotterdam School of Management shows that employees of self-sacrificing leaders are more cooperative because they trust their leaders more. They are also more productive and see their leaders as more effective and charismatic.

4. Encourage people to talk to you – especially about their problems. Not surprisingly, trusting that the leader has your best interests at heart improves employee performance. Employees feel safe rather than fearful and, as research by Amy Edmondson of Harvard demonstrates in her work on psychological safety, a culture of safety i.e. in which leaders are inclusive, humble, and encourage their staff to speak up or ask for help, leads to better learning and performance outcomes. Rather than creating a culture of fear of negative consequences, feeling safe in the workplace helps encourage the spirit of experimentation so critical for innovation. Kamal Birdi of Sheffield University has shownthat empowerment, when coupled with good training and teamwork, leads to superior performance outcomes whereas a range of efficient manufacturing and operations practices do not.

When you know a leader is committed to operating from a set of values based on interpersonal kindness, he or she sets the tone for the entire organization. In Give and Take, Wharton professor Adam Grant demonstrates that leader kindness and generosity are strong predictors of team and organizational effectiveness. Whereas harsh work climates are linked to poorer employee health, the opposite is true of positive work climates where employees tend to have lower heart rates and blood pressure as well as a stronger immune systems. A positive work climate also leads to a positive workplace culture which, again, boosts commitment, engagement, and performance. Happier employees make for not only a more congenial workplace but for improved customer service. As a consequence, a happy and caring culture at work not only improves employee well-being and productivity but also improved client health outcomes and satisfaction.

In sum, a positive workplace is more successful over time because it increases positive emotions and well-being. This, in turn, improves people’s relationships with each other and amplifies their abilities and their creativity. It buffers against negative experiences such as stress, thus improving employees’ ability to bounce back from challenges and difficulties while bolstering their health. And, it attracts employees, making them more loyal to the leader and to the organization as well as bringing out their best strengths. When organizations develop positive, virtuous cultures they achieve significantly higher levels of organizational effectiveness — including financial performance, customer satisfaction, productivity, and employee engagement.

Article link: https://hbr.org/2015/12/proof-that-positive-work-cultures-are-more-productive?

Editor’s note : Due to a typo, this article initially misstated the number of workdays lost due to stress each year. That number is estimated at 550 million, not 550 billion. The sentence has been corrected.

• Emma Seppälä, PhD, is a faculty member at the Yale School of Management, faculty director of the Yale School of Management’s Women’s Leadership Program and author of The Happiness Track. She is also science director of Stanford University’s Center for Compassion and Altruism Research and Education. Follow her work at www.emmaseppala.com, on Instagramor Twitter.
• KCKim Cameron, PhD, is the William Russell Kelly Professor of Management and Organizations at the Ross School of Business at the University of Michigan and the author of Positive Leadership, Practicing Positive Leadership, and Positively Energizing Leadership.

Digital government is designed and operated to take advantage of digital data and technology to create, optimize and transform digital government services.

Why is it critical to continue and accelerate the transition to digital government?

Technology has become essential for remote working, distance learning, maintaining economies and keeping governments running.

Automation and delivering services digitally, wherever feasible, is imperative to the sustainability of many government operations. For most governments, however, the pace of change during a crisis is not sustainable once the crisis abates, due to risk-averse culture and lack of resources.Technology leaders need to help agency and political leadership understand why maintaining the appropriate level of digital acceleration is so important to government services. They can do so by identifying quick wins, aligning digital to political priorities and improving the agility of their operating models.One approach is to reprioritize ongoing and planned digital initiatives based on their use case and value. Some projects:May need to be stopped to free up investment and resources for other initiatives.Need to continue but at a steady (or even slower) rate to make room for more pressing needs.Are needed to address vulnerabilities exposed by the quick solutions put in place during the pandemic.Should be scaled and reinforced for long-term use, such as to support remote/hybrid working, digital citizen interactions and remote operations.Support longer term fundamental shifts in citizen and business behaviors, for instance replacing existing service with a more proactive and predictive approach in human services, public safety and even taxation.

Accelerate Digital Government 

What is the difference between digital optimization and transformation in government?

Digital optimization is the process by which government organizations use data to significantly improve what they are already doing. For example, a tax and revenue agency can enhance its risk analysis capabilities with predictive models to assess the likelihood of payment delinquency and take preemptive steps to avoid that outcome.Digital transformation changes the shape of how the government operates through a process of reinvention and creation. For example, that same tax and revenue agency could move beyond digital optimization by using its vast data resources, fiscal policy knowledge, forecasting expertise and deep-learning software. It could offer tax advisory services provided by virtual digital assistants for a nominal fee. This new source of revenue would be the result of digital transformation.It is important to exercise caution whenever a “transformation” project or program is announced or already underway. It is quite possible the charter and scope of such a project calls for a complete reinvention of government operations by exploiting digital data and technologies. However, upon closer examination, the actual goal of a transformation initiative may well be the optimization of the organization’s existing capabilities and value proposition.

Digital Govt Ecosystem 

What are the key technologies to support digital transformation?

Several technologies contribute to digital transformation. The most relevant are:

Digital government technology platforms, which are a set of cross-cutting, integrated, horizontal capabilities that coordinate government services across multiple domains, such as citizen experience, ecosystem, Internet of Things, and IT systems and analytics.

Digital citizen identity to support online authentication in interactions with government, and increasingly across sectors and jurisdictions, overcoming past identity silos.

Hybrid cloud computing, i.e., one or more public and private cloud services that operate as separate but integrated entities, offering a combination of cost optimization, agility and scalability of public cloud with control and compliance that are typical of the private cloud.

Data sharing across the whole government, leveraging multiple data sources to create new value and achieve improved outcomes. This requires government departments to be willing to expose data and be able to analyze it through a systematic and scalable approach that can reuse data and innovate services.

Total experience is a strategic approach designed to improve the engagement of citizens by providing them with modern tools across multiple channels and touchpoints that enhance overall experience, inclusion and equity. Moving away from a singular focus on customer experience improves the chances that governments can improve the quality of their services and capacity to deliver on their mission in the future.

Govt Technology Trends 

Who is responsible for digital government transformation?

Many government leaders think that “digital” means more technology and turn to the CIO to deliver. And if that doesn’t work, they bring in chief digital officers (CDOs) or chief experience officers (CxOs) to drive the way the government delivers. But while these roles bring great insight, they almost always lack the actual authority to execute.Ultimately, while the titles vary, it is the chief executives of government organizations who are accountable for strategy and execution. Other C-suite members also play a key role in digital efforts, including: The CIO, who is responsible for technology enablement.The chief digital officer, who is mostly responsible for ideation.Mission-unit leaders, who are responsible for the digital delivery of their agencies’ services. A governance framework is essential to define which roles are responsible or accountable for various aspects of a digital transformation program and who needs to be consulted and informed.Most governments have fallen short because real transformation or optimization requires changing business processes, often across organizational silos. This is not an IT problem; it’s a government leader’s insight and ambition deficit.

Be a Top Notch Govt CIO 

How can digital transformation progress be measured?

No. 1: Digital strategyDoes the digital strategy reflect the expected degree of urgency, take into account the readiness of the agency and aim to improve the digital maturity of the organization? To measure progress on this count, you’ll need a self-assessment tool, such as the Gartner Digital Government Maturity Model, that pushes the CIO or other digital leaders to examine the breadth and depth of its digital strategy and its adequacy to the digital ambition of the organization. The assessment looks at several areas of the strategy and suggests what key steps are required to increase maturity in each. The purpose is not to achieve the maximum maturity in each area, but to achieve sufficient maturity to meet the organization’s digital goals.No. 2: Execution of digital strategyTo gauge how successful an agency is in executing strategy, benchmark against peers in the government sector and elsewhere. Tools such as the Gartner Digital Execution Scorecard use digital key performance indicators that are compared to those of industry peers. This generates objective benchmark reports that show relative strengths and weaknesses in different areas of digital execution based on ambition and peer performance comparisons

Digital Business Roadmap 

What are the critical success factors for digital government transformation?

Lessons learned from governments that are already more digitally advanced surface keys to success. This group consistently includes transformational activities in their programs, show a wider range of focus and are more successful at scaling digital across their organizations. Among the attributes and behaviors that set them apart, they:

Both transform and optimizeby redesigning existing end-to-end processes, creating new digitally enabled services or ways to deliver value and automate parts of end-to-end processes to transform citizen experience.Use clear calculated digital success metrics to measure digital impact and maturity. For example, they are far more likely than less advanced governments to monitor and report on regulatory compliance, transparency and auditability, mission impact, efficiency, workforce safety and productivity.

Adopt contemporary practices, such as user research, human-centered design, co-creation, journey and life event mapping.

Deploy common technologies and platforms, such as digital identity solutions, integration platforms, artificial intelligence (AI) technologies and robotic process automation (RPA).

Digitalization Strategy 

What are the main challenges for digital government transformation?

Digital transformation programs still face a number of significant challenges, including:

Siloed organizations. Silos exist across governments, departments and business areas. Each silo requires different types of interventions, which affects strategy, funding, and successful implementation.

Risk-averse culture.Governments are particularly sensitive to risk. Executives are fearful of failure, which reflects badly on elected officials. Frontline workforces focused on service delivery can also be change-averse, as they do not perceive any benefit in altering their proven practices.

Funding. Funding challenges are often a symptom of one or more problems, such as siloed strategies and decision making, as well as considering technology expenditure an operating expense rather than a strategic investment.

Digital skills gap. Core-specialist competencies in areas such as enterprise architecture, cybersecurity, cloud, analytics and digital experience design are vital to successful digital transformation programs, but tend to be in short supply in government.

Resourcing. A lack of timely access to business or subject matter expert resources is often a direct symptom of disconnected priorities, siloed decision making, cultural challenges and a lack of digital dexterity at the executive level.

Article link: https://www.gartner.com/en/topics/digital-government?

Realistic Digital Ambitions 

For executives and their teams

Webinars on Digital Government Priorities and Actions

Government CIOs, Eliminate Friction to Enable TransformationWatch Now 

Gartner Panel: Public Sector Privacy Best Practices to Build Citizen TrustWatch Now 

Build Momentum in the Transition to Digital GovernmentWatch Now 

The 10 Conditions To Sustain Digital Transformation in State & Local GovernmentWatch Now

August 24, 2022

Contributor: Robert Naegle

Change the way you tell your IT value story to drive greater impact.

With digital strategy taking center stage in the fight against today’s economic headwinds, there’s never been a better time to bring your technology initiatives to life through a compelling value story. That requires unwavering focus on the outcomes and goals your stakeholders really care about.

At its core, a great value story resonates with business leaders, supports their decision making and aligns to their key objectives or concerns. Focusing on measurements of work performed, tasks accomplished or resources deployed won’t get you there; instead, focus on communicating outcomes delivered.

See IT Recession Playbook:Actions to Jump-Start Your IT and Digital Strategy

7 rules for creating a compelling value story for IT

We developed seven rules that CIOs can follow to craft and articulate stronger business value stories. Gartner predicts that through 2027, CIOs who implement these seven rules will be 75% more successful in elevating their strategic contribution to their organizations’ missions and increase approval rates for funding requests by 30% over current levels.

Watch Webinar: 7 Rules for CIOs to Successfully Demonstrate the Business Value of IT

No. 1: Remember that the IT stakeholder always determines value

IT stakeholders and consumers, not the providers/producers, determine what is of value. When identifying what is valuable, it’s essential to  align tightly with the business. Without a clear line of sight to business priorities, IT is likely to stay focused on delivering technology or platforms , rather than meeting business objectives, benefits or outcomes.

Identify your key stakeholders and/or consumers, starting with business leaders as the primary stakeholders. Capture, validate and regularly reassess their needs.

No. 2: Note that not all outcomes are equally valued

Team with business leaders to identify and rank their business priorities (for example, value/revenue increase, or cash savings then efficiency gains) then align IT resources to deliver the prioritized outcomes. Capture and validate quantified benefits with key stakeholders and leadership.

Note that your organization will typically value impacts to mission and revenue growth more highly than spend avoided and cost reductions, and budget contributions are considered more valuable —and easier to measure — than efficiencies gained through process improvements.

No. 3: Build two value narratives, for operating and transforming

IT can enable the business to run (operate) and change (grow/transform) but its value for each objective is perceived differently by stakeholders so value measures for ‘run’ and change initiatives should differ. If one initiative covers both, highlight both the differences and the interdependencies in any related communication.

Measure the value of:

• change spend with metrics like return on investment (with returns owned by those receiving the benefits). 
• run spend through price for performance (striving for more performance at a better price).

No. 4: Measure IT’s impact on stakeholders’ objectives, not IT effort expended or resources consumed

Measure business outcomes, not IT work. Platform, systems and infrastructure performance make up elements of IT production, they do not represent quantifiable value to the business stakeholder.

Document the desired/intended business outcome, as agreed to with your stakeholders. Measure IT’s impact on mission or contribution to business outcomes and avoid metrics that communicate effort, work or technical output.

No. 5: Align IT costs to the business services they enable

Stakeholders will better understand IT’s value when IT costs are linked to the business services and capabilities that IT delivers. Costing parts or technologies does not support a value conversation. Value conversations must include both cost and benefit.

Cost the value delivered at the business outcome level (e.g., cost per seat of an application or cost per transaction of critical business services). Include both costs and benefits in all project proposals to determine net value.

No. 6: Communicate IT value in the language of the stakeholder

Use business language, not technical terminology and acronyms, when communicating IT’s value. Keep communication with business leaders clear, relevant, easily understood and designed to drive decision making.

Avoid deep dives into technology and platform capabilities and translate value messaging into actionable insights that support critical business decision making.

No. 7: Ensure those who fund IT understand its contribution to their objectives

Finance and business leaders who fund IT must understand IT’s value and impact on business outcomes, even when they are not the direct recipients of the value. Engage economic buyers early in the value definition process. Make spend justification and value definition a collective effort between IT and key stakeholders.

A productive CIO-CFO relationship is critical to ensuring digital strategy receives appropriate funding. Strong CFO-CIO relationships are more likely to find funding for digital initiatives readily and to keep digital spending in line with the budget plan. Digital funding will lag if CFOs and CIOs don’t align onan enterprise-level view of how to measure the outcomes and success of digital initiatives.

Adapt these rules for your organization

For maximum impact, use these rules as a starting point for framing and guiding your IT value narratives. To adapt to your organization, ask:

• Does this rule apply to our organization?
• How should we customize this rule for our organization?
• Can we emphasize this rule in our business value of IT communications? When and how?
• What else should we do differently to communicate a more clear and impactful value message?

In short:

• IT and digital strategy is critical in today’s economic conditions. You need an impactful IT value story to help business stakeholders make sense of and buy into your technology initiatives. 
• Follow these seven rules to ensure IT and digital strategy stay focused on the outcomes your business partners care about.
• Hint: Don’t talk about IT in terms of the technical work performed, tasks accomplished and effort required.

Robert Naegle is a Research VP focused on CIO issues of finance, economics and business value. His coverage areas include IT financial management best practices and technologies, business value of IT and cost optimization strategies.

Article link: https://www.gartner.com/en/articles/7-rules-for-demonstrating-the-business-value-of-it?

Sent from my iPhone

One of the largest nonprofit health care systems in the U.S. is dealing with a wide-ranging IT security issue forcing it to shut off systems at some facilities. 

CommonSpirit Health – which has more than 1,000 care sites and 140 hospitals in 21 states – said on Monday that it is “managing an IT security issue” impacting several electronic health record systems. 

The Chicago-based ​​company did not respond to requests for comment but said in a statement that it is “following existing protocols for system outages and taking steps to minimize the disruption.”

“As a result of this issue, we have rescheduled some patient appointments. Patients will be contacted directly by their provider and/or care facility if their appointment is impacted,” the company said. 

The statement did little to assuage the anger of customers across the U.S. who reported having issues at their local hospital or with their doctor. Several patients said their doctors were having problems accessing the MyChart tool, which is produced by a company called Epic Systems. 

An Epic Systems spokesperson said the outages were “an isolated incident with one customer: CommonSpirit Health.”

Several local news outlets across the U.S. reported on hospitals in their area facing issues due to the outage. 

MercyOne Des Moines Medical Center had to divert ambulances on Monday due to the outage, and other issues were reported at CommonSpirit’s facilities in Chattanooga, Tennessee.

The Omaha World-Herald reported that all CommonSpirit facilities in Omaha were impacted, including Lakeside Hospital, Creighton University Medical Center-Bergan Mercy and Immanuel Medical Center.

A Washington state news outlet saidSt. Michael Medical Center in Silverdale, Kitsap County’s main hospital and St. Anthony Hospital in Gig Harbor have all been affected by the incident as well. 

Although the company did not respond to requests from The Record about the nature of the incident, cybersecurity researchers including Kevin Beaumont suggested ransomware may be involved.

Ransomware attacks on health care organizations have continued throughout 2021 and 2022, including recent attacks on a California nonprofit in March and a major Texas hospital one month ago. 

In August, the LockBit gang launched a devastating attack on a hospital about an hour south-east of Paris, which disrupted its medical imaging, patient admissions, and other services. 

Ransomware groups and hackers have also made a point of targeting organizations throughout the health care supply chain like CommonSpirit in an effort to cause the maximum amount of damage.  

The United Kingdom’s National Health Service is still struggling to cope with a ransomware attack on an IT provider this summer. The FBI warned two weeks ago that hackers are going after health care payment processors to steal data and money.

An August ransomware attack on printing and mailing services provider OneTouchPoint had several downstream effects on its customers, prompting it to release a data breach notice on behalf of 34 health care organizations. 

In June, the sensitive information of two million people was accessed during a cyberattack on Shields Health Care Group, a Massachusetts-based health care organization that provides services to more than 50 hospitals and clinics across the northeast, including hospitals at higher-education institutions like Emerson College, University of Massachusetts, Tufts University, Wellesley College and more.

A February ransomware attack on medical debt collection firm Professional Finance Company caused a widespread data breach affecting 657 health care organizations.

Article link: https://therecord-media.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/therecord.media/massive-u-s-nonprofit-health-care-system-grappling-with-it-security-issue/amp/

Jonathan Greig 

Jonathan has worked across the globe as a journalist since 2014. Before moving back to New York City, he worked for news outlets in South Africa, Jordan and Cambodia. He previously covered cybersecurity at ZDNet and TechRepublic.

“I can tell you at DoD, we’re taking this very seriously,” DoD CIO John Sherman said. “And we are committed to implementing zero trust at scale for our four-million-person-plus enterprise that we lead.”

By JASPREET GILLon August 25, 2022 at 2:36 PM

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon’s chief information officer is committed to implementing a zero trust architecture across the entire department in the next five years and will be releasing a new strategy to get there as soon as next month.

“What we’re aiming for is by 2027 to have zero trust deployed across a majority of our enterprise systems in the Department of Defense,” DoD CIO John Sherman said at a FedTalks conference Wednesday. “Five years. That’s an ambitious goal… but the adversary capability we’re facing leaves us no choice but to move at that level of pace.”

To get after its zero trust goals, the Pentagon plans to release a new strategy as soon as next month. The strategy will define DoD’s approach to zero trust between the “main controls” to the most sensitive systems. Sherman said that within the last month, he also hired a new deputy chief information security officer to bolster the office’s efforts.

“I can tell you at DoD, we’re taking this very seriously,” he said. “And we are committed to implementing zero trust at scale for our four-million-person-plus enterprise that we lead.” 

RELATED: Pentagon CIO Hopes CMMC 2.0 Will ‘Raise’ Cybersecurity ‘Waterline’

Cybersecurity remains one of Sherman’s top goals, specifically figuring out how to get after the “technical debt” DoD has accrued over the last 20 years. The Pentagon needs to start thinking of new ways to protect its weapons systems, networks and data and ensure they’re “cyber safe” and secure in a way that it didn’t have to do “staring down the Taliban or ISIS or other adversaries,” he said.

Sherman said cybersecurity can’t be an option, especially when China and other adversaries are trying “to steal our data to put our service members at risk.”

To that end, the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) version 2.0, the Pentagon’s major cyber certification program, was moved under Sherman’s purview earlier this year from the office of the undersecretary of defense for acquisition and sustainment. During an AFCEA Space Force IT Day conference in February, Sherman said he wanted to focus on clarifying requirements and increasing engagements with small- to medium-sized companies in hopes of raising the overall “water level” of DoD’s cybersecurity defenses against China and Russia.

“This is basic hygiene to raise the water level to make sure we can protect our sensitive data so that when our service members have to go into action, they’re not going to have an unfair position because our adversary’s already stolen key data and technologies that’ll put them at an advantage,” he said then.

At the FedtTalks event, Sherman said a new cyber talent strategy will also be released in the next few months. The strategy is in the final stages of coordination and involves people from DoD’s personnel, readiness and policy teams thinking “differently about the environment we’re in,” he said. 

“This is the space race for this generation, if you want to be honest,” he added. “We’ve got to get this right, we need to draw on every bit of talent.”

Article link: https://breakingdefense.com/2022/08/five-years-to-zero-trust-pentagon-has-no-choice-but-to-speed-network-goals/