Bridging The Gap: Public and Private Sector Similarities

Evanta’s communities of CIOs and CISOs hail from different organizations, industries and backgrounds. When executives gather for networking and collaboration, the Phoenix community members found it important to bridge the gap between the public and private sectors so audience members can take away valuable lessons across industries. Regardless of the topic, it’s important for IT and security professionals to dispel myths commonly associated with working in the private versus the public sector to form a clearer understanding of their peers’ organizations.

At the Phoenix CIO and CISO Executive Summit, Bianca Lochner, CIO of the City of Scottsdale, Elizabeth Neeley, CIO of the Arizona Department of Education, and Gary Desai, CIO of Discount Tire spoke on a panel and shared unique perspectives on the similarities and differences of the public and private sectors. 

The panelists covered a variety of topics, including innovation, data security, organizational culture and talent. Bridging the gap, the panelists thought, would give the audience a better understanding of the industries when deciding on a career path or their next move. 
 

What are the differences when public and private companies decide to innovate?

Elizabeth Neeley: The innovation drivers are the main difference. Private organizations might be looking at new technology to expand a market or improve profit. They are willing to invest in the innovation of solutions. 

In the nonprofit, public sector, the need to innovate might come from a federal or state program statute, and limits are set to what direct or indirect funds can be used to manage that program. In government, you may have no or very little consideration on what it will cost to maintain that innovation in the future. Our innovation must come from creative and innovative ways to use the tools, solutions and staff we have on hand.

Gary Desai: Innovation is key for the private sector. Technological innovation has disrupted the business model for old world industries. Amazon disrupts retailing; WeWork disrupts commercial real estate; Orbitz disrupts air travel; Uber disrupts the traditional taxi and automotive industries; and Airbnb disrupts hoteling, and so on. 

Many of these disruptors do not own any assets, which is a very innovative way of thinking -- and old world industries need to adapt or they will perish. Innovation in private industries gets slowed down due to risk averseness or sacrificing current profitability, and most importantly, the inertia to change due to roadmaps already being set and in the process of execution. Many progressive, private company boards have now set up separate technology and innovation committees that meet regularly to incorporate innovation into their business strategy.
 

What are the similarities when public and private companies decide to innovate?

Elizabeth Neeley: The desire to innovate.

Gary Desai: Failing is a fact of innovation, which is common to both public and private sectors. Failing fast and course correcting is key to successful innovation. This is a technique that only a few have mastered -- whether in the public or private sector. Innovative ideas can be generated at any level in the organization, but the support for innovation must come from the top leadership irrespective of the public or private sector.
 

Did you discuss any other differences and similarities during the session? 

Elizabeth Neeley: I think one difference I was amazed at was that the budget is allocated for proofs of concept in private or for-profit industries, which is not something you see readily in government with limited budgets.

Gary Desai: Both public and private sectors have the same set of challenges in areas of innovation: cybersecurity, compensation, motivation, need for talent and leadership skills. The difference lies in the severity of the issue between the sectors and the approach to finding a solution. For example, motivation is handled through higher compensation in the private sector, as opposed to championing a noble mission and purpose to motivate employees in the public sector. 

Cybersecurity solutions are much more shared within the public sector, while organizations may be more reluctant to share cyberattacks within the private sector, which could directly affect margin or stock price. 

In my opinion, leadership in the private sector is much easier with clearly defined areas of responsibilities and a hierarchical organizational structure that works top down for most parts. In the public sector, there can be overlapping authorities between various government agencies and always the threat of policy change with newly elected officials, which can be detrimental to longer term planning.
 

How is data security paramount across industries?

Elizabeth Neeley: Each industry has their own set of security requirements, whether it’s from their chosen framework or regulatory requirements. Security today, in any industry, is critical. Some may not be protecting confidential data, so threats to individual industries can differ.

Gary Desai: Security in the public sector is paramount in terms of electric grid, water supply and defense, which can risk many peoples’ safety. With an exception to the healthcare industry, which can create a safety risk, most of the security issues in the private sector can be dollarized for financial implications where tradeoffs can be made. 
 

What’s your biggest takeaway from the session?

Elizabeth Neeley: We each have the same challenges but solve each one differently.

Gary Desai: I agree with Elizabeth’s takeaway.

For more opportunities to discuss similarities and differences among many topics within the public and private sectors with your CIO and CISO peers, join your local Evanta CIO or CISO community.

Content adapted from the Phoenix CIO and CISO Executive Summit. Special thanks to all participating companies.