There’s much said and written about a shortage of I.T. talent by many parties and for many different reasons. The RPO’s (Recruiting Process Outsourcers) are in the business of selling their service to companies who don’t believe they have the talent on staff or amount of talent necessary to recruit for all their needs (see Hyrian). The Technology industry itself complains almost daily about the difficulty in recruiting and hiring the talent they require and the need to increase the number of H1B visa’s allowed each year. Consulting companies proselytizing to the media "that 10 Million jobs will remain unfilled by the end of the decade." And of course Professional Recruiters are heard delivering their sermons to anyone that will listen that with the dearth of talent companies have but no choice to employ their services to retain the talent they must have. I won’t say these folks have a conflict of interest but they all certainly benefit if conventional thinking is that there’s a shortage of talent.

So are they right? Or, is does this sound a little like Chicken Little crying that the sky is falling? The answer is that they are both right, partially. The facts are:

- More people are retiring than entering the job market.

- Fewer kids are going into critical technical fields like Engineering and Computer Science.

- It is more difficult to recruit the talent companies require today than in previous years.

But boys and girls that’s where the “facts,” such as they are, end. I believe in Einstein’s’ Theory of Relativity (that is if Einstein was a Headhunter). Everything is relative and here’s where the “chicken little” part comes in.

Fact #1 is that more people are retiring than entering the workforce but what’s not being written about is that more people than ever before are working past retirement age. In point of fact, 38% of those surveyed for a March 8, 2008 article in HR Review said they intend to work well beyond the age of 65 and, that number is believed will increase over the next 8 years or so. There are many reasons why (better health, greater financial need, etc.) but the biggest will be demand. Yes, Keynesian theory (please take out your Economics 101 text) will most definitely apply.

Fact #2 is that fewer kids are going into technical fields. Anyone that’s tried to recruit and/or fill needs for junior level technical talent (1-3 years of experience) can attest to the dearth of individuals available. The burst of the tech bubble in 2001, the continued move of lower level (see Programming, Systems Administration, etc.) offshore, etc. are all factors in why the numbers are less today than in 2001 but closer examination of the numbers reveal that we aren’t as bad off as everyone wants to believe. In an article in eWeek.com, the numbers show that more Bachelors in Computer Science degrees were granted in 2007 than in 1997. While that’s still a far cry than those granted in 2000, that should be looked at as an anomaly rather than the baseline. Interest in all fields, I.T. include, is cyclical.

Fact #3 is that it’s more difficult today to recruit and fill needs for highly skilled talent than in most of the last 20 years. As a recruiter myself I know this to be absolutely true. However, why is this occurring? Is it simply because of the lack of volume of talent? In a word, no. There are several factors but I believe the single biggest issue is one of perception. The perception that all the jobs in the field have or are moving to India, China and Eastern Europe as well as that IT simply does not have the “rock star” status it did in the late 90’s can shift the future workforce down other paths when reality says there will be plenty of work. So what proof do I have this is perception not reality? How about the US Dept. of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics. The 2007 BLS report released in December projects record increases in I.T. job growth from 2006 to 2016 with the only exception being a 4.1% decline in programming jobs.

So with record increases (demand) set to occur for the next decade yet fewer grads (supply) you’d expect increases in compensation, benefits and bonuses and/or, flexibility on required skills to offer opportunities for training to secure the best and the brightest talent. After all economic theory provides for precisely this reaction by the market. However, if you expected this to be occurring you’d be dead wrong. Because with all these economic forces conspiring against companies seeking to hire talent the biggest impediment to securing that talent remains the companies themselves. To put it simply, companies are being inflexible and often unrealistic in their expectations as well as offering very ordinary compensation packages thus acting as if we’re in a slow market where the supply of candidates exceeds demand. Regrettably, this could not be more wrong…