Volume 2, Number 4

Your IS Staffing Model -- Does it Change with the Times?

By Bill Gower


"Let's hire good permanent employees and invest in training - that's the way to build for success."

"Hiring contract consultants is the way of the future - we get the exact skills and level of experience we need when we need it. It's more productive."

"The concept of bringing in contractors and converting people to permanent is a great idea."

Sound familiar? Such dialogues are taking place in IS organizations all across the country. Executive-level managers may like the traditional, permanent approach. Technical managers want specific skills and immediate control of contract resources to meet pending deadlines. With their eye on the company's bottom line, HR managers opt for "Contract to Permanent" - getting the best technical people in, trying them on for size, and converting them to permanent while saving money in the process. It does seem logical. The real answer may be that everyone is right - and, in many ways, wrong. Certainly, every organization is feeling the stress of change that is sweeping through the IS industry with an unparalleled force.


Change is the Only Constant
What is causing this change? The answer is a host of variables at work simultaneously.
    • Changing technology has brought about more business benefits, incrementally faster, than ever before.
    • More companies are implementing new technology now and truly starting to see major productivity gains from their efforts. They are hoping for even greater ROI down the road. This focuses their plans on more new development and implementation.
    • Demand for technical skills far outstrips supply in virtually every marketplace in America.
    • Computer Science curricula have delivered a smaller number of graduates in recent years.
    • The new technologies are not just new application software innovations. The "new" is unrelated to methods of the past and therefore requires radically different experience and skill sets, i.e. client/server vs. mainframe; object oriented vs. traditional development methodologies; networking the franchise with groupware vs. the one-on-one user/IS department relationships of the past. And, what about the help desk today vs. the help desk of several years ago? These are only a few of the more obvious examples - some of the more obscure issues can really reach out and bite. For example, try and construct a web site that pleases all internally and stays constantly refreshed...
    • Despite the huge investment in client/server environments, legacy systems remain and are being found, in many cases, to be the right solution for their respective needs. Thus, legacy systems are not going away, at least not any time soon. And guess what? Legacy systems must be supported, and what is the definition of support these days?
    • The Year 2000 challenge is upon us. We're quickly moving past awareness and are ready to move to the solution planning stage. When solution implementation hits in late ’97 and early ’98, watch out! All available resources will be funneled through for "the solution." This is one deadline that will not budge. Also, another dimension is that many companies will opt not to refurbish or rewrite code but, instead, to buy new software. That means more resources will be necessary to install the new systems successfully. Salaries and rates may go through the roof.
      Other major contributors to our severely changing IS landscape: individual motivations and value shifts. Recent downsizing, layoffs and employee uncertainty have left an indelible scar. Whereas contract consulting was the exception five years ago, today it is a viable lifestyle and most participants have more work than they want. Finally, social values have shifted. IS professionals value environment, shorter commutes and being satisfied with work content more than in the ’80s and early ‘90s. New permanent job opportunities as well as new contract assignments are being more rigidly scrutinized for acceptability by the individuals. Truly, it is a sellers’ market for the candidates.


Decision Triangle
One thing is certain: the executive team, the technical managers and the HR department all have a role in resource acquisition, motivation and retention. They must work together with a cohesive plan or there will be a less-than-successful outcome. This "triangle of responsibility" requires definition and enthusiastic embrace of roles and responsibilities or it will contribute heavily to a failed overall effort. Some conclusions that can be drawn from some of today's more successful IS organizations:
  • A sound, "Core Group" of permanent employees is a must. These people have a permanent mindset and aspire to leadership roles. Your company's investment in these people will be rewarded with long-term commitment and tenure. The longer these people are with the company, the less likely they will leave.
  • Technical skills provided by contract consultants is definitely en-vogue. This occurs because it is impossible to train internal employees fast enough to keep up with rapidly changing technology and demand. Even if it could be done, the newly trained employees would immediately become targets for being hired away by consulting firms or other desperate organizations. Also, today, many of the strongest technical people are "going contract" due to the demand for their skills, flexibility provided and potential earnings. Why should a Visual Basic programmer earn $50,000 in a permanent job when he or she can get $35 to $40 per hour, plus overtime and W-2 around $85,000 with full benefits in a contract capacity? The answer is they will take the contract route unless they ultimately want a career in management or the stability that permanent employment offers.
  • Contract-to-permanent is a play that looks good on the white board in the conference room, but does not work in the real world. Without a doubt, it is a failing strategy. Occasionally, a contract consultant will convert successfully and stay converted for a career. When that conversion happens be glad, seize the success of the moment and stay very close to the now new employee. Six to eight months from now when the offer calls start coming and the new hire is working more than 40 hours with no overtime pay, look out! In 1991 one out of five contract engagements converted to permanent. In 1996, one out of thirty-five was the conversion rate. And, of the ones who converted in ’91, how many are back in contract consulting today? Quite a few!
Why would a permanent employee with a permanent mindset give up a permanent job, go the contract route and hope he or she can get converted to permanent? It will not happen. With an unemployment rate of 0% in the IS community, an individual can have his or her pick of permanent opportunities. Another problem is by asking for contract-to-permanent candidates only, the search universe of potential candidates is severely restricted. And, again, even those who say they may consider this route are very doubtful. If a permanent opportunity is desired, an individual can look and find permanent directly without a contract interim. Therefore, the most productive approach is to define the need as contract or permanent and conduct the search accordingly - avoid the gray area of contract-to-permanent.

These issues seem to be more complex the deeper we go. Processes for hiring permanent vs. contract are different; timetables are like night and day. For example, hiring for permanent positions typically requires many interviews, several days or weeks of time, background checks and possible testing. Procuring contract skills will fail if more than a day or so is spent - the best candidate will be gone. The window of opportunity is vastly different, depending on permanent or contract.

And what about the role of HR, which is valuable in either scenario? HR typically is more hands-on in the permanent process than with the contract consultant process, but should be integrally involved either way in the front-end manpower planning process.

However the problem is viewed or the solution structured, the executive team, the technical managers/leaders and HR professionals must come together and work as one. Following are some suggestions on how to facilitate the successful integration.
SUGGESTIONS ON WHOM TO INVOLVE AT EACH HIRING STAGE

ACTION
EXECUTIVE
TEAM
TECHNICAL
LEADERS
HUMAN
RESOURCES
Develop staffing plan
Yes
Yes
Yes
Manage the plan
Yes
No
Yes
Source candidates - Permanent
No
No
Yes
Source candidates - Contract
No
Yes
No
Interview process - Permanent
Yes
Yes
Yes
Interview process - Contract
No
Yes
No
Test - Technical
No
Yes
No
Test - Background
No
No
Yes (permanent)
No (contract)
Consummate the hire
No
No (permanent)
Yes (contract)
Yes (permanent)
No (contract)
Constantly evaluate results
to Plan and adjust
Yes
Yes
Yes
Constructing Your IS Model
To begin, recognize that every organization has a model today. The model may not be formally recognized as such, but we all have a "method" of going about the acquisition, motivation and retention of technical Information Systems resources. The model may have the trilogy of executive, technical and HR management involved in full or part, and may currently be producing adequate talent for the IS organization or may be in disarray, causing consistent and numerous staff openings. Whatever form the model takes, you had better be prepared for more change and high-demand stress. Information Week recently reported that more than 191,000 IS jobs are vacant in large and medium-sized companies in the USA. This survey did not include small or non-profit companies. There is one vacancy for every ten current IS workers. And, demand will double for IS professionals over the next five years!

The message is clear - formalize your model internally and begin refining the processes to your culture. There is no time to waste if the challenge is to be met successfully. How is this accomplished? Consider a seven-step approach to establishing your model for exemplary results:

1. Executive, technical leaders and HR management should jointly review the business initiatives of the company as projected for the next year or more. Agreement should be reached on objectives of IS in supporting these initiatives. Review planned new development, ongoing support and maintenance, current projects in process, current and required manpower, existing skills and anticipated skill set needs. This will require a detailed preliminary assessment by each entity within the IS technical management group. They may represent teams, projects, technology sectors, locations, etc. However, all current and future needs and resources must be accounted for with as much supporting business justification as possible. Determine shortfall and surplus conditions for manpower or skill sets, and the time frames that are applicable.

2. Examine the current IS organization and identify the Core Group - the must-keep individuals who aspire to leadership roles. Identify the marginal and less desired people who probably will not be around three years from now. Define who are the core individuals in strategic roles and plan skill-development and staged soft-skills enhancement programs for them. Plan to move the future managers into leadership positions over resource groups in the future one, two and three years. Situate the individuals with minimum future into pure technical responsibilities or plan them out. Do not allow them to put the organization in a vulnerable negative multiplier position down the road. This effort needs HR’s full attention on the front-end.

3. Review trends that have been occurring in your company's IS culture. Key in on strengths, weaknesses (be critical), turnover ratios by group, hiring patterns for success or failure, technical training and the monies being invested for true ROI, demonstrated performance to manage contract resources, and retention rates of staff. Examine who is being retained - the best or the marginal talent? Examine secession patterns - who and why people are promoted and the results. Compare overall IS organizational status with competitors, if possible. Procure external data (DataQuest, Gartner, others) to scrutinize any specific trends that could be a direct factor with the current staff or anticipated plans, i.e., offshore resources, flex hours, casual environment and telecommuting.

4. Review the current overall approach to contract consultant management. Following the Core Group strategy, permanent employees will be in the directing roles and contractors in supplemental roles. Are contract consultants acquired for a specific technical purpose, and is that spelled out in terms of expected results and terms? Establish an extension policy - ensure that extensions are appropriate and not just convenient. Also, build an internal communications method for informing core project leaders that a highly regarded consultant's term will be ending soon (1-2 months) and describe their specific skills. Planning will enable the organization to retain top contract talent. Retention of these skills with knowledge of your culture is almost as critical as retaining core permanent contributors. There is nothing wrong with retaining a good contract consultant for several years if the utilization of the resource is planned. One Fortune 50 organization averages more than 1.5 years per consultant because it selects and re-deploys well, and it knows the true value of high-demand technical skills. Its plan works well! It also holds each core leader very accountable for results and ROI. Accountability makes the core leader forget about the issue of contract or permanent and focus on results, deadlines and meeting the plan set out by the company. After all, that is the issue and one really takes care of the other.

One fallacy emanating from the past is the argument of valuing contract consultant expenditures. For example, some would say a consultant costs $60+/- per hour x 2,000 hours per year, or $120,000. Obviously, they would say, a permanent person should be hired who would just cost around $55,000. This is old-world thinking and will not win in our current state of market. Consider that most contract engagements average six months, so in the course of a year that will represent two or three projects, and possibly with one or more (different) core managers. Perhaps, the project is longer and will be 18 months. In any event, the expenditure is temporary and the service provided by the individual fulfills a specific need in a timely fashion - and that is the point. To "straight-line" cost unjustifiably is a false economy. Determine where resources are needed for core and hire permanent, and staff contract for supplemental technical needs. Do not let this get hazy or become a gray area. Then, manage the two different types of people and mindsets accordingly.

5. The model should reflect the current organization, as well as needs and plans for the future. Determine what percentage of the total resources are permanent vs. contract. Peg that number - it becomes the company guideline. Is it an 80/20% model? Perhaps 70/30% in year one, 75/25% and 60/40% in years Two and Three, respectively. The model contains associated company processes for skill acquisition, resource management (permanent and contract) and retention. The model should take into account where the company plans more or less future investment; strategic moves, such as acquisitions or divestitures; and overall IS resource deployment. Now, instead of just an IS department, you have an IS resource with the muscle to enable the life-support actions of the company. The model serves as a new way of looking at IS internally, bringing IS in tandem with the strategic direction of the company and forcing an ongoing, global critique of overall IS performance. This new view needs strong support from the top. "This is how we do business and how we run the business" should be the message from the CEO and CIO. They should be happy because the business can deliver system results, maximum flexibility and respond immediately with new technology, when appropriate. The IS department is now positioned truly to assist in profit generation - not just be viewed as a mega cost center.

6. Seek and build true partnerships with vendors who can staff the permanent and contract needs. Ask the vendors for help in laying out the rules, then ensure that everyone lives by them - including the client organization. Make the goal to have partners who will deliver the best talent in an expeditious manner and with integrity. The goal is not the largest discount - you get what you pay for. However, volume in permanent and volume/term with contract are important considerations to a vendor. By selecting a few partners, some economies may be realized. Always evaluate your partners on a regular and predictable schedule. Make changes only when lack of performance dictates - but be decisive.

7. Work the model for continuous improvement. Every associated process will need constant scrutiny for ways to make it work better for all: executives, technical leaders, HR, the user community, contract consultants, perhaps purchasing, and others. All must understand the purpose and the benefits - "this is how we do business." Solicit all participants in the model for their ideas for improvement on an ongoing basis. Then the model will begin, over time, to gain internal ownership. Bring the vendor partners in quarterly for updates on anticipated technical trends and potential skill needs. Publish performance trends so that each partner knows the answer to, "How am I doing?" - there should be no surprises. A good principle on which to build and work the model is from Stephen Covey's habit, "begin with an end in mind."

This seven-step approach may change the entire look and the personality of the IS organization. Over time, the new approach will instill a feeling of corporate self-esteem and ultimately contribute more profit. The IS department will feel a sense of being mobilized to "get the company where it is trying to go." The feeling of purpose and strategic importance is difficult to articulate but everyone within knows of its existence. This model, if built and cultivated, will work successfully. We have seen the success occur in organizations who are savvy to the changing landscape of corporate America. Remember that a "model" always exists; the key is - what will be the state of each company's individual model? The IS paradigm has changed. Those who ignore the development of their IS staffing model will find it increasingly difficult to deliver the technical infrastructure that firm-wide success will demand. Those who look ahead and plan for the continued wave of technical change will be the leaders of the future. Failing to plan is more like planning to fail.


About the Author
William "Bill" Gower is a founder of MATRIX Resources, Inc., an Information Technology placement firm serving the Atlanta, Dallas and Phoenix markets. His IT industry experience spans 30 years, including positions with IBM and Comshare, Inc. He has been counseling permanent and contract IT professionals since 1981. He can be reached at Bill_Gower@MatrixResources.com

Do you have concerns about workplace or technology issues? The MATRIX Essentials White Paper series includes more than 20 relevant topics to help you better manage your business—from comprehensive staffing strategies, to the latest market trends in VMS and Managed Services, and key factors affecting IT project success. View our entire list of White Papers for the topics that interest you.

ATLANTA
770-677-2400

CHARLOTTE
704-426-1100

HOUSTON
713-622-8383

PHOENIX
602-522-3300

BIRMINGHAM
205-314-5200
DALLAS
972-778-1800
NEW JERSEY
908-719-8960
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK
919-653-1500