Amidst the frenzy of activity over the past few months, there are early indications of the direction IT is likely to go in the future. Take the role of policy in shaping the IT agenda in the states. Whether a policy is concerned with identification, emergency response or public safety, it is becoming increasingly difficult to separate out the use of technology from other considerations such as privacy and security. Managing IT has traditionally been more about technology than it has been about policy. This is likely to change.
To help formulate these policies, top state officials will look to their CIOs for advice and guidance. This will result in a need for CIOs whose capabilities, style and skills will be very different from the strengths top officials had prized in their CIOs during the past few years. For instance, states have looked for CIOs with private- sector experience or those who could serve as champions of economic development and entrepreneurial e-government initiatives. Going forward, they'll be putting a premium on CIOs who can provide sound advice and counsel concerning such thorny issues as the best way to use IT to protect the physical safety of citizens without unduly jeopardizing their rights to privacy.
The states will also need CIOs whose style is highly collaborative. Much of the hard work that is under way in response to the terrorist attacks is being done in communal forums--task forces, ad hoc committees and similar horizontal organizing mechanisms that bring together people from a range of agencies or departments or skill sets. To be successful in this kind of environment and to help shape future plans, CIOs will need to be able to reach out and educate others.
Another sign of the emerging era is a reassessment of state capabilities to provide services--both online and off-line--without interruption. This is one of the greatest areas of vulnerability facing the states. It is one thing for a state Web site to go down for several days because of a denial-of-service attack that's the result of a relatively harmless computer virus. It's another thing altogether for a state not to be able to respond with emergency services if there's a terrorist attack. The states may find themselves turning to the private sector for much of the day-to-day responsibility for operating the information infrastructure in a cost-effective and secure manner.
State and local governments can learn valuable lessons from private industries directly affected by and able to recover quickly from the September 11 attacks. Backup facilities in remote locations, off-site storage of critical records, mobile communications and up-to-date contingency plans made a critical difference. Some companies highlighted the importance of customer relationship management systems that helped them restore services immediately to customers whose operations were wiped out by the attack. Consider how important it may become to know precisely which residents live in a particular neighborhood and what public services they receive.
New structures for managing IT in the states are being put in place. Hierarchical arrangements that encourage a "silo" mentality are ineffective for supporting much of the work that needs to be done. The command-and-control centers established by the law enforcement and intelligence communities at the federal level in the weeks following the attack are good models for the states to consider. It would have been almost unimaginable for such structures and reporting relationships to exist prior to September 11. It will soon be hard to imagine how we operated without them.
Perhaps the most fundamental change we experience will take place in our assessment of what are the best and highest uses of IT resources. For the past few years, there has been a growing sense that IT was increasingly being applied to less and less valuable goals, that advanced Internet technologies were being employed on behalf of relatively low-priority public concerns such as paying parking tickets online and making reservations at local parks. Now, e-government initiatives are likely to be tabled if they aren't aligned with a state's new priorities.
Much rests on the shoulders of those called upon to lead in these difficult times. While the immediate past may offer some guidance, there is a great risk in trying to maintain a status quo that was appropriate for a different era. After September 11, state and local IT leaders will need new, fresh thinking about how to manage technology in the years ahead.
