CurtMonash writes "Barack Obama promised to appoint the United States' first Chief Technology Officer. Naturally, the blogosphere is full of discussion as to who that should be. I favor American Management Systems founder and former IRS Commissioner Charles Rossotti. Richard Koman thinks it should be one of the better state CTOs. John Doerr, going in a different direction, thinks it should be his partner Bill Joy.
We can bandy names back and forth all month, but first a more fundamental question needs to be answered: What do we need most — a get-things-done CIO (Chief Information Officer), or a more visionary true CTO? I think it's a CIO, and based on his campaign statements it appears Obama agrees. Management of government IT is a huge, generally unsolved problem, and we need somebody deeply experienced to have even a fighting chance. Of course, that doesn't preclude recruiting a visionary CTO in addition, but the highest priority is a CIO.
Do Slashdot readers agree?
[With Slashdot pages timing out, it's hard to know if a submission got in. I apologize if I wind up submitting multiple times!]" Link to Original Source
This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Should the United States' new CTO really be a CIO? 0 Comments More Login /
Get More Comments