Patrick Johnson on Unlocking the Potential: Enhancing Cyber Workforce and Technology in the Department of Defense

(: 00:20

Hi, thanks for joining us on Tech Transforms. I'm Carolyn Ford here with special co-host, Willie Hicks. Hey, Willie.

Willie Hicks (: 00:27

Good morning and hello all.

Carolyn Ford (: 00:30

So today, Willie, we welcome Patrick Johnson. He is the director of the Workforce Innovation Directorate at DoD CIO. Patrick has spent his career in the DoD and is heavily involved now in the DoD's workforce portfolio and talent management programs. And we're really excited to hear Patrick's insights on how the DoD is creating the right balance between an effective cyber workforce and the use of technology as well as the DoD's plans when it comes to automation. This topic right now, I feel like every leader that we talk to, Willie, in the government, when we ask them what keeps them up at night, this is in their top three, right?

Willie Hicks (: 01:18

Agreed. Yes.

Carolyn Ford (: 01:19

So we've got the expert here. So welcome, Patrick. Thank you so much for joining us.

Patrick Johnson (: 01:26

Hey, thank you for having me. I am pleased to be able to engage on this topic and I'm excited to be here.

Carolyn Ford (: 01:32

Well, like I said, we're super excited to have you. I want to start off by talking about the DoD cyber workforce strategy that came out this year. You've talked about how the department's path forward will emphasize an enterprise-wide talent management approach for all of DoD's cyber workforce. In your opinion, what are the key factors in creating the right balance between an effective workforce and an effective use of technology in securing your digital systems?

Patrick Johnson (: 02:07

That's a really good question. And right now the department's cyber workforce... And we say total force because that includes military, our industry partners as contractors, and our civilians... is about 225,000. And of that, where we have the biggest lag is in our civilian workforce, and that's about 75,000 in terms of how we approach that. One of the problems as we bring new technologies online, you're familiar with Zero Trust, how we're driving that endpoint security and the other aspects of that, well, it's great to put new technology on the table. But if you don't take the time to train the workforce you have in the programs or the systems you're bringing online, you lose that effectiveness and you don't really gain the efficiencies or the objectives that you need to be. So it's about training and upskilling. I like the word upskilling as opposed to re-skilling because re-skilling implies I'm going to take you from one place, and put you in a completely different widget, and have you just take off. That rarely works in the civilian workforce because they have to go back to the beginning.

(: 03:20

It really is about looking at your talent and your gaps and then giving them the training they need to execute the new technology appropriately. So you have to balance that and look at it. One of the things I like to say is, nobody has enough people, and we should not be afraid of automation. And automation comes in a lot of different forms, but we, as a department, are looking at what AI can play in that realm.

(: 03:47

There is a security concern as we unleash AI into our environment because this is a very protected and guarded environment, but it shouldn't deter us from bringing that to the fore. Because if you look at a cybersecurity analyst or a defender, and they're focused on the basics. There's a lot of what I call attention to detail nug work. You cannot expect a human being to catch every detail. It's, how do you partner with the automated process, the AI process, that goes through that and highlights the anomalies you should be looking at, and then expedite that to help you be better at your job to catch more of the threats and intrusions that are coming through?

Carolyn Ford (: 04:32

Yeah. And I know there's a lot of fear around AI. I was just having a conversation with a friend, who, she's a child psychologist. So she did her Ph.D. She did a lit review for her Ph.D. and she's like, "I just found out that ChatGPT can do a lit review in minutes, to do what took her seven years." And she's like, "That is very unsettling to me. It feels really threatening." And I'm like, "Well, let's unpack that a little bit." Because what ChatGPT can do is all that rote stuff that you were just talking about, Patrick, right?

Patrick Johnson (: 05:12

That's right.

Carolyn Ford (: 05:13

And it can do it better than we can do it. It can find those details and gather them for you. And now, you can spend your time in the creative process, in the really putting the human side to it and making it something amazing. So ChatGPT or any generative AI compiles all of this stuff that took you seven years to research and, now, think about the possibilities.

Patrick Johnson (: 05:47

And that's exactly how I look at it. If you look at some of the things Microsoft is doing, and others, their approach isn't saying, "AI is in the forefront." It's about partnerships. And it really is looking at AI as kind of your wingman or wingperson-

Carolyn Ford (: 06:07

I love that, AI is our wingman, Willie.

Willie Hicks (: 06:15

Yeah. I'd use that one too.

Carolyn Ford (: 06:15

That is awesome.

Patrick Johnson (: 06:16

I think, when you stop and think about it, she was like, "I'm going to be replaced. It was able to go through all of this." AI can do a lot of things and do it really well, and I like to call that the nug work, the stubby pencil, the things that are tedious that we spend way too much time on, and not enough time on the creativity portion of that in terms of what has to be thought through, what actions need to be taken next. So AI can expedite that and to do it really fast. I understand the angst having, in the '80s, I worked in industry in terms of I watched computerized machining come online. And suddenly, you didn't need 10 people to do one task. You only needed two or three. That doesn't necessarily mean that those 10 are now out of work. It's about, how do you fit in and use the technology that is there.

(: 07:12

So for individuals that are bent on just being one thing or doing a particular way, it's going to be a struggle. You have to look at it, and I like the term wingman, don't think of it as a threat, but think of it as a multiplier. And for those that have been reluctant to use it, you need to sit down and play with it. It's out there. Right now, DoD, we can't bring it into our ecosystem, but that hasn't stopped me in my personal life. Or, when we have the Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer, that organization, they're steering hard at... That's one of their primary missions. So we're looking at, how do we incorporate this and move things along? And it goes back to, I'm looking at the various positions and you go across an organization, and I've never went to an organization where they said, "We have enough people. We have exactly the number we need to perform the mission." Everybody's short. This is like adding a person to a person, a half to your staff right off the bat. And it boosts your productivity, if used correctly.

Willie Hicks (: 08:22

It is interesting because I have a lot of these conversations as well with leaders across DoD and our civilian agencies, and I think everyone is speaking at the CIO level, at the CISO level, they're all speaking the same thing, that they understand that, to your point, and I use the same verbiage that it is a force multiplier. And communicating that down to all the layers, making sure everyone understands that, understands that, to your point, this is not new. AI itself-

Patrick Johnson (: 08:58

No, it's not.

Willie Hicks (: 08:59

But these concepts are not new. I can go back 100 plus years and you can look at the advent of the steam engine, you can look at a lot of technologies that have come out and people were like, "Oh, this is going to do away with all the people that we employ riding horses, delivering mail. This is going to do away with all the people who are building these first cars on the assembly line when we get robotics." All of these things happen. But what people forget is that, "Oh, now, we need people who can maintain the steam engines. Now we need people who can maintain the robots that are building these cars." And you know what? Those are actually even higher paying jobs. Those are even more critical jobs because these become critical parts of the company's infrastructure or the agency's infrastructure.

(: 09:47

So I think that anyone I speak with, I'm like, "We should embrace this and that you shouldn't worry that this idea, this generative AI, what we call Chat..." I think everybody thinks ChatGPT, they think that's the technology-

Carolyn Ford (: 10:05

I know.

Willie Hicks (: 10:06

That this GPT-

Patrick Johnson (: 10:06

No.

Willie Hicks (: 10:07

That this generative technology is so far away from what I would call general AI, because I think what you just talked about is that this is really just doing all the menial... I don't like to say menial tasks, but these are all the little, not menial, but-

Carolyn Ford (: 10:23

Yeah, menial.

Willie Hicks (: 10:26

Yeah. But these tasks are not creative tasks. And computers and AI... It is so far away from a computer that can actually have creativity, that can have almost... You start thinking sci-fi when you start thinking about computers that could actually take jobs, and be creative, and write symphonies, and do these... They can simulate. They can take a lot of data and make a facsimile, but that's not creativity. And I think that's what I always try to encourage people that that is a... I don't like to say I'm a predictor of the future, but I can say, we barely know what consciousness is from a scientific standpoint. We are far away from actually recreating that in a computer, if that makes sense?

Carolyn Ford (: 11:12

Okay. Let me go off on a really quick tangent here, have you guys seen Guardians of the Galaxy 3?

Willie Hicks (: 11:18

I have, yes.

Carolyn Ford (: 11:19

Have you seen it, Patrick?

Patrick Johnson (: 11:22

I have not. I have not seen it.

Carolyn Ford (: 11:23

Patrick, come on. So I just recently saw it and I was talking to an author, he did some stuff on 5G and why we should worry about what China's doing with AI, what China's doing with 5G. And then his silver lining, or hope, or whatever was just that, what we have here in America is creativity, innovation. So coming back to Guardians of the Galaxy 3, the bad guy, he quotes Jon Pelson almost word for word. This is what differentiates us. We can create, we can innovate. We're not just copying. We're not just doing the facsimile.

Willie Hicks (: 12:15

And I think also our motivations, I think, are different. I think that's also what drives us. And we will not get into politics on this podcast, but I will say, a lot of times I worry because... And this is way going off on the tangent, but we do this from time to time. But in other countries, I'll say, where AI is really being utilized for better understanding what the people are doing, understanding, and monitoring people, and how they're behaving, and how they're... I think that how we are looking at AI, how we can use it to enable us to augment our capabilities so we can actually leap to that next... to leapfrog in our next era of technology, I think that's also what makes us different in the AI. I know a lot of people worry about losing the AI race to other countries, other adversaries, but I still believe that that's one thing that sets us apart. That's just my personal opinion.

Patrick Johnson (: 13:29

No. There's an ethical piece to this. And obviously, our Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Office and that principal staff assistant is really looking hard at the ethical use of AI. And yes, I would say some of our peer competitors, without naming anybody, they're not really worried about the ethical aspect of it. And in the western society, the order that we have operated in for almost 90 years in a very prosperous, peaceful way, it is concerned about that. And it goes back to what I said earlier in, it's easier to correct than create. And AI is really great about giving us that framework to seize upon and then begin to put our creative mind to it and say, "Now, what can I do with this? How can I change this?"

(: 14:30

And if we ask AI to solely create something, it's simply, as you said, it's regurgitating those things. So looking at it, using it for creativity and enhancing our capability, I think that is one of our strengths as a nation. I think for the Western model, that innovation, that free thinking, I think that is a powerful advantage. And I'm not saying it doesn't occur in other systems, but it's often not allowed to prosper and find its full voice and capability. There's always an ulterior means to the state or to the party.

Carolyn Ford (: 15:10

So Patrick, since we're on the AI topic, talk about how you're using AI to better the workforce. You mentioned it as a key factor.

Patrick Johnson (: 15:27

So for right now, and truth in lending, we have not let AI into the ecosystem, but we're using it enclosed. And that's really on the Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer's side of the house, how they're using it to improve everything for maintenance schedules when we need to do particular things, and how to track and monitor certain issues. So it's just now they're running different capabilities to see where it fits within the department, how we can best use it. So we're really at the infancy of that and we're embracing it as opposed to saying, "No, no, we don't want to touch that." So I would love to give you a lot more examples, but it really is, we're still feeling our way around. We're saying, "We've got this great technology, we recognize the potential." And our congressional leadership is also pushing, "We need you to move faster." So that is what the department is focused on and how can we do it not just ethically, but safely so it doesn't create security risks for our systems in other ways.

(: 16:36

So I would love to say we're blazing trails in this, and we are in certain aspects, but I can't really talk about that here, of course.

Carolyn Ford (: 16:45

But you're using it for those rote, menial tasks that we mentioned earlier. You just said schedule-

Patrick Johnson (: 16:49

Oh, absolutely.

Carolyn Ford (: 16:49

I mean, how many hours is involved in scheduling, right? And you're using AI to help with that?

Patrick Johnson (: 17:00

It does expedite things and we're constantly looking at processes. So for right now, how we're employing it in the human capital arena is, I'm using AI to expedite how I acquire talent, how we match applicants with the jobs that are needed, how we keep the process going and engaged. Oftentimes, when you apply to a federal job, it's done through a particular system that is kind of a post and pray approach, and it really discourages applicants. How can we expedite that? How can we look at, for example, different training offerings, certifications, and others? How does that align? Can I do that manually? Yep. It takes three to six months to do that kind of work. Or, I can automate that using AI and the large language model. This is outside of... It's GP... but not GPTChat for... enclosed and expedite that so I can go through thousands of offerings and align them to the different things that I want to on the work role side of the house. We haven't even talked about the work roles and how we're using that to manage the workforce.

(: 18:13

So we're doing that now in terms of looking at training offerings and certifications using AI to match that up to the qualifications we have. So I can not accredit it, an offering, but validate that it aligns to my requirements. That's already starting to pay dividends for us.

Willie Hicks (: 18:35

So I had a question, and just bouncing around ideas. I may be going back just to take, but we've been having a fantastic conversation about the technology now, and the workforce, and how we can best integrate that. Maybe if I could just take a step back, because I want to understand in this... And you mentioned your congressional partners and so forth. I'm sure there are a lot of people who want to understand what is the impact on these programs. Okay, so we're bringing in this technology, we're talking about AI, and so forth. So how do you continuously measure the impact of these programs and making sure that you are maintaining that right balance between the workforce and the technology that you're bringing in? And something that we were talking about earlier I wanted to bring in too is that, even before you get to that point of the measurements, have you baselined the workforce to understand where they're at?

Patrick Johnson (: 19:37

Oh, that's a really good question. I know we went off in multiple directions, so this will help focus things. What we did is, we looked at the cyberspace workforce. And traditionally, when we talk about cyber, everybody says cybersecurity, but the cyberspace domain is much more vast than that. And there's an AI piece to that. There's a software engineering piece to that. There is a data model specific to that. There are offensive and defensive cyber operations, which are completely outside of what you normally encounter. And how do you manage that, and feed it, and all that builds on itself. So the first thing we did was, basically, we had worked with NIST-NICE to help develop the NICE Framework. And we took that work and expanded it with the Defense Cyber Workforce Framework, because we do things in the department that aren't necessarily done throughout the federal government. For example, we are the only ones that can legally operate offensive operations against a peer component or a non-state actor. So when you look at that, we developed our work roles-

Carolyn Ford (: 20:46

War games, is that what you mean?

Patrick Johnson (: 20:48

What's that?

Carolyn Ford (: 20:49

I'm trying to interpret those words that you just said, "You're the only one that can do offense", is it war games?

Patrick Johnson (: 20:57

No, no. It's not war games. When we say offensive operations, where we take actual action, offensive action against an enemy of the United States. So if there is a terrorist organization that is doing something, we can actually go after to shut down their networks, that type of thing. And that's a hypothetical, so I don't want to get myself in trouble.

Carolyn Ford (: 21:23

Yes. Understood. Understood.

Willie Hicks (: 21:24

Yeah. No, no. Yeah.

Patrick Johnson (: 21:26

So when looking at this, we looked at our work roles and we started looking at how do we measure and how do we decide what you need to do? So we focus not on so much competencies, which tends to be the traditional model. We focus on the work that actually is done. And it's task-oriented. And really, when we talk about knowledge, skills, and ability, it's just another word for competency, but it is focused on the end task. And the idea is to get to where you can demonstrate performance in the job. And ultimately, you're aligned to, "This is the work we need you to do, code that entire workforce." And right now we have coded about 158,000 military and civilian. Contractors' a little hard to do. So we've identified that workforce, where it's at. We've identified the capability. And we have something called the 8140 Qualification program. Then that qualification program is designed then to make sure that they have the skill sets necessary to perform. And so we can track that. And we're building out that tracking mechanism right now. So that's a good as is.

(: 22:35

So now, you add to that, and if you go back to the strategy, career pathing and others, you've got your as is. You can see where you have nodes of skill spread around the department. The department is vast. It's a pretty big setup. And you can decide, "Do I have excess in one particular area and how does that align to what I need?" So I can look at the various work roles. And this process of using work roles and how we update it, we can update faster than basically DoD systems and services can keep up with it. We can do it on a quarterly basis.

(: 23:15

Right now, we have to slow our role, let the systems and the services catch up to it. So it's about every six months, but that's a much more adaptive, and flexible, responsive process to the workforce than, say, traditional occupational series, which can take years to add or change. We can go back to the stakeholders because technology changes rapidly. So that's how we're looking at it. That's how we're managing it. Right now, we even incentivize not by occupational series, but I incentivize by work roles. So if I have a critical skillset, I can identify that skillset, the work that needs to be done, and incentivize that work. And that actually saves me money. And how it does that, traditionally, you'll look at an occupational series and say, "We're short." So I'm going to incentivize everybody. But by focusing on the disaggregated data, I can identify a subset of that occupational series, because I'm looking at the work they actually perform, and target just that, and achieve a much better result in terms of affecting vacancy rates and other things.

(: 24:24

Now, as we acquire more data, because the coding initiative is still building strength, now we're going to be able to use it for predictive analysis. And we'll be able to start projecting. Here's a very, very simple example of that, if I'm looking at your attrition rates and your vacancy rates, your losses, your gains, I can also see how many people you're hiring in the course of a 12-month period. And we can track that. And there's what we call a refresh rate, are you bringing more people in the course of 12 months than you're losing? And if you're losing more, even by one, you're going backwards, by any measure you put it. And people will argue severity of it, "So I lost one more than I brought in." That has an impact because a lot of these skill sets, high training demand, and very hard to get, and you don't have 5,000 of them. So if you've only got 10 that do that and you've got two that's not on the team, that's 20%. That's a significant effect.

(: 25:28

So being able to project that in real-time for leadership, and this is some of the things we're doing in terms of the data realm, where I can put up in real-time when I have brief leadership, not with slides, but say, "Hey, if you do nothing right now, in the next two years, your vacancy rate is going to go from 17% to 37%. You need to take action now." And it's about being proactive in that.

(: 25:56

And I envision also having a greater impact in terms of looking at the gap analysis in talent. So as we get everybody online and trained according to the standards, then start looking at it, what additional training do we need to bring in within the department? Because the services have the responsibility to train, man, and equip. We have to work closely with them and give them the lead time to say, "Okay. Now, you need to ramp up and you probably need to be doing this." So it's not so much saying, "You will do." It's about being proactive, identifying issues and problems when they're small before they turn into a raging fire and we can't tamp this stuff down. I think that's the best way I can put it.

Carolyn Ford (: 26:41

Is part of your strategy to retain talent... You said that you're identifying skillsets, so do you move people around a lot? Do you see people, they'll be in one job and you're like, "Yeah, but they have this really strong skillset over here. They have these interests over here." And so you shift him around, is that part of the retention strategy?

Patrick Johnson (: 27:05

So that is part of the retention strategy. And my boss, Mark Gorak, he is the Principal Deputy for Resources and Analysis, the DCO, he likes to say, "It isn't a competition because we do compete at some level for talent with other federal agencies in the industry. Stop looking at it like that." And I absolutely agree. So the ability to move people around seamlessly between industry, military, and civilian workforce, right now that's not a thing. I think of it as permeability. That is part of the strategy and we are looking at what legislative changes we'd have to seek from Congress. But before we do that, what processes and authorities we currently possess, which would allow us to do some of these things without going to somebody and saying, "We're going to need more authorities", or, "We're going to need more." So we are focused on that.

(: 28:07

When we talk about the strategy, it's based on four pillars. The first one is identification and the second one is recruitment. Then it's development and retention. And it has four goals underneath that. There are 38 initiatives, 22 objectives. So it's expansive over a five-year period. It's designed to be monitored and changed frequently. If something's not working, we'll go back. But if you're looking at our original four goals, the goal three is very simple. It says, "Change the culture, change the culture of how we acquire talent."

(: 28:46

And within each one of the services, there is a unique culture and we value that. There's nothing wrong with those cultures. As a matter of fact, it is the strength of each one of the services. And even our agencies have cultures. But the culture of how we acquire talent, that has to change. And we have to look at, why can't we take somebody on the military side and seamlessly transition over here? Or, can we not send people out to industry? Seamlessly bring industry in, exchange that? We know that the traditional, certainly in this arena, and I think you probably have both experienced this, the traditional 30-year career, you come to this place, you're going to stay here forever and ever, that is just not... It's not a thing anymore.

Carolyn Ford (: 29:31

No. It's not a thing anymore.

Patrick Johnson (: 29:33

And we have a lot of advantages working within the federal government, but the one thing we don't do is, we penalize people who go outside of the system for any amount of time. It's like, "Oh, you don't want to be on the island anymore. So we're going to put out barriers for you to get back on the island." We need to rethink that. And it needs to be not only, "Hey, you're going over in the industry and you're leaving us. Well, we can't keep you. Great." How do we keep in touch with that person? How do we make it advantageous at a lighter time, because they're going to acquire skills, they're going to acquire knowledge? If they decide they see an opportunity, how do we make it seamless so they can come back to us?

(: 30:12

There's a lot of challenges there, but that's how we're looking at it. So right now, most of our civilian employees, it's difficult to move them. I want to change that and I think the department needs to change that over the next five years, saying, "Hey, you're here. We really need you over here." How do we make that seamless, or flow, or how do we reach out in the industry and bring surge in?

Willie Hicks (: 30:36

I was actually... I was talking to Mark a few weeks ago back at Billington, and one interesting thing he also brought up is that not only making that seamless transition that you mentioned, but also what I took away from it is almost better marketing of the jobs in the services, in the DoD for civilians as well.

Patrick Johnson (: 31:07

Oh, yeah.

Willie Hicks (: 31:09

Better helping people understand really the benefits, because sometimes people just think, "Oh, I can go to industry and make a much higher salary, blah, blah, blah." And I think, from what I understand, not just the DoD, but all the agencies are looking at, "Okay, how do we better compete for a very limited talent pool? But also, how do we better market all the benefits that come with working for the Army, or Air Force, or what have you?" And I always thought that was interesting because I... Actually, he was [inaudible 00:31:44] me. I didn't even realize how many benefits there were that came with some of these roles.

Patrick Johnson (: 31:49

There are huge advantages, but I also recognize there's a time to stay, there's a time to go. We need to make that cyclical. It's not goodbye. There's going to be another opportunity. You got a job waiting for you here, we're interested. How do we keep that touchpoint? On the military side of the house, everybody's seen the recruiting commercials, "Aim high and be all you can be." All right, you name it, there's 30,000 people involved in that effort across the services. When we talk about civilian talent, there's only a couple of hundred dedicated full-time.

(: 32:23

And when was the last time you saw an advertisement for a DoD civilian, be part of the civilian workforce? You have it and it is a messaging, but that doesn't mean there's no interest, because this is a two-part equation. You need a better job of messaging. But we also, in terms of reaching talent pipeline, reaching out to our university partners in the academic world and bringing students in, we need to be a better job of creating entry-level and developmental positions for them to come to. Because when I go out to schools, I've got kids coming up to me all the time, "How do I get into... DoD's mission is interesting to me, how do I become part of the team? I've tried applying, and it goes into a black hole, and I never hear anything." That is also a paradigm because when we say, "We can't hire right out of school, we're just not competitive", that's not entirely true. I've got lots of applicants that I don't necessarily have a place to send them, because it is disjointed.

(: 33:20

So this is part of that process of tying all this together, creating a talent marketplace of supply and demand, and matching that together. And this is something that's going beyond the cyber workforce where... I don't know if you've heard about the new Chief Talent Management Officer, that's Mr. Brynt Parmeter, that was appointed to that. But the department is looking at this model also across other functional communities. In other words, it'll work. If it works for cyber, why wouldn't it work for aviation or why wouldn't it work for logistics? It's going to work for just about any approach you want to take. Identify your skillset, what work do we need, identify your gaps, and then start building pipelines. Not a pipeline, but pipelines of how you acquire this talent.

(: 34:12

And this also neatly fits with the president's management agenda in terms of the workforce and what they're putting out. We've got people, we've got talent. And I think we talked about it earlier, one of our advantages in terms of our creativity, our diversity, let's capitalize on this. Let's go hunt for talent in places we generally haven't. Doesn't mean you're automatically giving anybody anything. We're just going to where the talent is. If you have one of the largest imbalances in our workforce, especially in this area, and we're short. How do we do that? How about we go to where they are. Go to where they are. We don't have to do anything else. You can argue different points, but let's just start with, let's go talk to where they are. Let's go find them and put the message out that not only are we hiring, but we value your talent, and we'd like you to be part of the team.

Carolyn Ford (: 35:10

How do you-

Patrick Johnson (: 35:11

And that applies across any one of the areas we're looking at. So that's part of the push.

Carolyn Ford (: 35:18

What are the incentives to come work for government?

Patrick Johnson (: 35:21

Well, look-

Carolyn Ford (: 35:22

I mean, it's hard to look past the money. I'm just going to be crass, let's just talk about the money.

Patrick Johnson (: 35:28

Look, you're right. We have an authority under the DoD for the cyber-accepted service. And I'm looking at some information on there. And one of the biggest complaints people list, about 60% of the people you talk to, money is a factor. But if you start digging into that, money's not the only factor. Let's first deal with some facts. If you're working for the federal government, we are never going to compete with the highs of industry. We're just not. But at the same token, if you take an Amazon, let's just start with Amazon, so not everybody in Amazon is making 230,000 plus a year either. So when you start comparing this across industry, their cream of the crop, what they're targeting, they do pay them well.

(: 36:18

But at the same token, let's take a software developer or a software engineer, take your pick, I like to say a software developer has the lifespan of a goldfish. It's kind of the half life, because they'll work very hard for two or three years. And then technology, they've got to be refreshed. So a lot of the times, if you cross over to industry, you'll find yourself on-call, working 14, 16 hour days. You're getting paid for it, but that distorts work life balance. You get stock options and that is great as long as the stocks are riding high. When they're not riding high, suddenly it doesn't look so great.

(: 36:58

So if you're looking at crossing into the civilian world, some of the advantages, at least within the department... And these are also true for our federal agencies... we are the only ones left that offer a fixed annuity. So you're guaranteed a certain amount in terms of retirement, everything else is tied to a 401(k), and we know the pitfalls that go with that. And we can argue about, it's your money, you should be able to do what you want. That's true. We also have a TSP, which gives you that aspect combined with that work-life balance. We're not going to work you 12, 14, or 16 hours without compensation. And it's looked at in terms of [inaudible 00:37:40]-

Carolyn Ford (: 37:40

And when I first started my career, that work-life balance thing, I did not... It was just a term, right?

Patrick Johnson (: 37:46

Correct.

Carolyn Ford (: 37:47

And now, man, that is the number one thing for me. And what I'm hearing you say, so you're saying that government offers stability, a career path, on the job training, a solid retirement plan, work-life balance. So those are my buzzwords.

Patrick Johnson (: 38:05

And medical.

Carolyn Ford (: 38:05

As a marketer, I'm pulling out my buzzwords.

Willie Hicks (: 38:07

And medical.

Patrick Johnson (: 38:08

Oh, you're correct. And if you look on the medical side of the house, so the exchange we operate in, this is separate from the federal exchange. You are not going to find a better deal unless you're with Congress on the medical front. And that is critical because the average American family is paying about 1,200 to 1,500 a month in health insurance for a family of four.

Carolyn Ford (: 38:30

That's crass, by the way.

Patrick Johnson (: 38:34

That's staggering, and not necessarily getting the best plan. So I can line those advantages up... Look, I actually had an offer to go and work on the commercial side of the house and it was a significant bump up in pay. But when I looked at what I would have to set aside to make up for what is lost, you're looking at between 40 and $60,000 that you think you're not getting, but you are. Now, that's not the end all be all. And there are opportunities on the outside, and I'm not saying leave, but if you're asking, "Well what are some of the advantages?", give us a try and see for yourself. There are some good things over here. And our mission is really dynamic. We've got some areas where we are doing things that impact the nation and outside of the nation at the international level. You could get that at Walmart kind of, or you could get that at Microsoft. But are you really going to do that in such small numbers in national level that kind of significance?

Carolyn Ford (: 39:39

Yeah. The mission, the job satisfaction. Feeling like you're actually really making a difference, that's also a super big deal to me.

Willie Hicks (: 39:48

I'm putting on my corporate hat right now and just thinking... I speak always about public-private partnerships and how we, as private industry, we really need to be partnering more with the government. And as I'm listening to you, I'm like, "This is a place where we also should be partnering because I can see the importance of both ways."

Carolyn Ford (: 40:14

Oh, yeah.

Willie Hicks (: 40:14

You're talking about pulling people from industry, but at least I represent our public.

Patrick Johnson (: 40:18

I also want to send them out.

Willie Hicks (: 40:19

Yeah. So that was my point. And some of my best employees have come from government. They were either contractors or they were veterans. And they have... It's not just about the clearances and so forth they carry, but also they carry knowledge and just a different mindset that we need infused into, at least from a public sector, but I would say corporate-wide. We value our veterans. We value a lot of our government employees that come and work for the company. And I think it needs to be both ways. I mean, we should be able to easily accept people from the services, from the government because they bring such value to our company. But also, when people leave, I almost... I've had a couple of my engineers who have gone back over to the government side and I'm like, "I hate to lose you, but actually you are valuable to me over there too because now you're teaching others about what we do here." I don't think companies are thinking about it that way, but I think it should be something we are talking about from the industry and a government standpoint.

Patrick Johnson (: 41:27

So, absolutely agree. And that goes back to what I was talking about, permeability. I would like to kind of flip the supply and demand. I want to flood the market with supply and tamp down some of that demand. And I'm okay with training people and having them go out to industry because they're going to say, "I got my start in the department." And I'm even more okay with having them come back later, because you're going to acquire skills through industry that I can't give you in terms of some of the innovation that's happening there. We may be dragging our feet a bit on a security issue. I can then bring you back and you can expedite that process. So I see it very much as a partnership.

(: 42:09

Look, depending on what you're looking at, up to 700,000 vacancies in this area, it's a national problem. That's not just a DoD problem. It's at the federal level. It's at the national level. And we won't solve it with one actor taking the lead and saying, "Oh, we've got this, we've got the answers." Not so. And it is a partnership between the department, our industry partners, the defense industrial base and all that supports that, and then looking at our military and our civilian workforces. And that is how we'll get after it, trying to interchange and share that talent, share that knowledge instead of, "Nope, this is the way we do it. If you don't fit into the picture, you're not part of a solution." We can't operate that anymore. And it's about breaking down those barriers to ensure that we can partner with the industry. I think we're doing some of that now, but we can do a whole lot better job moving forward.

Carolyn Ford (: 43:09

Yeah. Well, your passion is evident and exactly what we need to make it better for all of us. But we can't let you leave without our tech talk questions. So in the spirit of Thanksgiving, Patrick, what's your favorite Thanksgiving Day tradition, if you celebrate Thanksgiving, or any holiday for that matter?

Patrick Johnson (: 43:31

Yes, I do celebrate. And as Willie mentioned, we're both from Alabama. So for me, Thanksgiving, it is intensely family affair. Gotten to the point of life that not as many family members are still there, but when we come together, Thanksgiving always means really reacquainting ourselves with immediate family, very, very deep traditions. And then the Auburn-Alabama game is normally played right following after that.

Willie Hicks (: 44:00

[inaudible 00:44:01].

Patrick Johnson (: 44:00

So it's, all the family gets together and they're different camps. And I've got Auburn grads and Alabama grads. And great wonderful Thanksgiving, reacquainting with family. And then we go to war on a certain weekend in November at the end.

Willie Hicks (: 44:18

Family divided, it always happens.

Patrick Johnson (: 44:21

It always happens. So I'm sorry, some people may think I'm weird, I cannot think of Thanksgiving in terms of that family environment. Immediately after you have Black Friday and then it goes right into the Iron Bowl. And to me, it's synonymous.

Willie Hicks (: 44:37

So I always like to know just what's the one technology you would love to see as a kind of a Black Friday grab this year?

Patrick Johnson (: 44:51

And I'm a little disappointed it hasn't advanced more, but VR, virtual reality. And I think it's still kind of a gamification. And even then, it's limited. So I would like to-

Carolyn Ford (: 45:06

Yeah. Have you played the Star Wars virtual reality game? It's so fun.

Patrick Johnson (: 45:10

I haven't seen that.

Carolyn Ford (: 45:12

It's so fun and so funny to watch the other people play. But I agree, the virtual reality... I was even thinking about doing the upgrade this year.

Patrick Johnson (: 45:23

Well, there's... I'm sorry to bring work back into it, but that there's so many training implications. So yes, I would love to see it take a quantum leap forward.

Willie Hicks (: 45:33

Well, you are already reading my mind because I was going to say the same thing. I was just talking about this, how VR is really... Today, it's really about gaming, augmented reality and so forth. But from a training standpoint, from a government standpoint, I see a future, a near future where government services might be VR-based. Or, I go to a museum, I put on some goggles, and I'm in a battlefield, and I'm walking down seeing-

Patrick Johnson (: 46:03

There you go.

Carolyn Ford (: 46:04

Yeah.

(: 46:04

All right. Well, Patrick, thank you so much for taking time to talk to us. Thank you for going off the rails with us. This is-

Patrick Johnson (: 46:12

You guys are great. I've never had a talk like this where we moved around in so many different areas, so I enjoyed it.

Carolyn Ford (: 46:23

So well, you have your homework, you got Guardians of the Galaxy 3 to watch, look into Star Wars VR for Christmas. But thank you so much. It's been a great fun hour.

(: 46:35

Thanks, listeners, for joining. Please smash that like button, share this episode. We will talk to you next week on Tech Transforms.

(: 46:44

Thanks for joining Tech Transforms, sponsored by Dynatrace. For more Tech Transforms, follow us on LinkedIn, Twitter, and Instagram.