When investigating recurring government failures, especially in technology, the root cause is frequently a broken HR or hiring process. The inability to hire and retain key talent is the underlying issue that prevents mission-critical problems from being solved. As Jennifer Pahlka says, 'it was workforce all along.'
Beyond budget cuts, a major threat to data reliability is a staffing crisis at the Bureau of Labor Statistics, where one-third of senior leadership positions are vacant. This loss of experienced personnel erodes institutional knowledge and resilience, increasing the risk of un-caught errors.
When a company consistently misses sales goals, the root cause may not be the sales strategy but a failure in the hiring pipeline. A high employee churn rate combined with an inefficient screening process starves the sales team of the necessary manpower to hit its targets.
Exceptional people in flawed systems will produce subpar results. Before focusing on individual performance, leaders must ensure the underlying systems are reliable and resilient. As shown by the Southwest Airlines software meltdown, blaming employees for systemic failures masks the root cause and prevents meaningful improvement.
The federal government is failing to attract young talent, with only 7% of its workforce being early-career compared to 23% in the private sector. This creates a significant risk as 44% of the workforce approaches retirement age, leaving a massive knowledge and experience gap that threatens institutional stability.
The primary bottleneck for successful AI implementation in large companies is not access to technology but a critical skills gap. Enterprises are equipping their existing, often unqualified, workforce with sophisticated AI tools—akin to giving a race car to an amateur driver. This mismatch prevents them from realizing AI's full potential.
Citing economist Ed Glaeser's 'capacity eats policy for a light snack,' the core argument is that the government's ability to execute—having the right people with the right skills—is a far greater determinant of success than the policy itself. Lacking execution capacity dooms even the best-laid plans.
While a single performance-based layoff can target underperformance, repeated rounds signal a systemic failure in leadership. It suggests managers are unable to hire, coach, or provide feedback effectively, making it a management problem rather than an individual employee issue.
Companies fail to generate AI ROI not because the technology is inadequate, but because they neglect the human element. Resistance, fear, and lack of buy-in must be addressed through empathetic change management and education.
The government's core model for funding, oversight, and talent management is a relic of the post-WWII industrial era. Slapping modern technology like AI onto this outdated 'operating system' is a recipe for failure. A fundamental backend overhaul is required, not just a frontend facelift.
Leaders who complain their team isn't as good as them are misplacing blame. They are the ones who hired and trained those individuals. The team's failure is ultimately the leader's failure in either talent selection, skill development, or both, demanding radical ownership.