Terry Gerton Jim, let’s start with this report and the why. ACT-IAC probably didn’t wake up one day and decide to inventory HR software. So what’s happening in the federal HR space that convinced you and this consortium particularly that this kind of research was necessary?

Jim Cook Terry, first thing was that as we were tracking the government’s direction on the modernization of HR, we noted that while the government was moving to acquire a core HR system, which was eventually awarded to Oracle, we recognized that some of the functions in the personnel arena are still highly specialized and wouldn’t be met by a particular single platform. And then we noted that OPM and OMB in a December memo noted that OPM was going to take on the responsibility to develop this marketplace of commercially available solutions to meet some of these specialized needs. So at that point we reached out to OPM and shared with them the fact that we have the ability to do this type of market research, given the large industry membership that ACT-IAC has access to. And the focus of the Institute for Innovation really being one where we are looking for ways to help government be more innovative and more rapidly acquire solutions. We thought this was a good role for us and a good opportunity to help jumpstart what the HR QSMO, Quality Service Management Organization, needed to do to develop this commercial solutions catalog.

Terry Gerton So, Gary, Jim has helpfully reminded us that OPM has already awarded its base contract for future technology to Oracle. When you think about the specialized services or needs or approaches that different agencies take, what opportunities does this sort of one-size-fits-all base create and what conflicts might it also present?

Gary Washington Thank you for the question, Terry. I think some of the opportunities for taking a standardized approach to core HR is efficiencies across the federal government, potential cost savings, and so there’ll be some level of interoperability that will allow people to benefit financially through cost avoidance for the implementation of modern technologies. And then a more modernized HR workforce is another benefit from this approach. I think some of the risks are, how do you attack the non-core HR functions that still require specialized tools, such as talent acquisition, assessments, performance management, benefits, decision support, employee relations? You know, how do attack analytics and workforce planning? across the federal government, which is what we try to help address. So I think HR 2.0 is, is a great step forward, but there, there’s definitely some additional things that we could benefit from across the Federal government.

Terry Gerton Gary, when I hear you walk through that list of specialized functions, it kind of makes me wonder what’s left to put in the base function. What’s left after you’ve taken all of those off the table? But Jim, let me ask you that question sort of more directly then. What’s the tension between standardization and agency choice here? And why is that question getting so much attention?

Jim Cook So the tension, I think, is I don’t know that I would call it so much a tension as I would call it a balance. And I think there is a necessary balance. So standardization is important for a lot of the reasons that Gary mentioned. Another one is when you think about the federal government as a large enterprise, and the fact that there are employees that move from agency to agency without a standard core system that essentially is a system of record for all personnel information, the ease of mobility across the federal government is really, really hindered. And that’s actually been something that’s been raised in past work that I’ve done in the workforce arena, even going back to the first Trump administration and some work that we were able to do with Margaret Weigert at the time who was trying to address this issue. So this common core provides a platform for the data and the core personnel record. But the functions of talent management assessments and so forth that Gary’s listed off can be tailored to particular agencies. There’s different type of workforces, there’s different agency cultures, there’s different requirements that those agencies have to meet. So what we’re really creating here and what OPM is really creating is this balance between the common core to manage the federal workforce information from an enterprise perspective. But then allowing agency-level specialization and innovation to meet the agency-specific needs as they perform those functions at the agency level. So that’s the balance, and I think the strategy makes a lot of sense from that perspective. It’s not a one-size-fits-all solution.

Terry Gerton Gary Washington is ACT-IAC’s Chief Strategy Officer, and Jim Cook chairs the ACT-IAC Institute for Innovation. Gary, let me come back to you then, because one of the other themes that comes through in this report is a concern about preserving an open marketplace. Tell me what you mean by that and what are you worried about?

Gary Washington Well, in terms of preserving an open marketplace, that’s really around the non-core functions because some of the agencies may have specialized use cases for some of their functions that I mentioned earlier. So they may require specialized tools for specialized functions in their agencies. So it’s not really, for the non core functions, a one size fits all. And it also will encourage competition among solution providers in terms of addressing agency needs.

Terry Gerton And are you worried that there might be some limits on competition here?

Gary Washington No, I’m not worried at all. There may not be limits on competition. There was a competition for the core functions. And as Jim mentioned earlier, that was awarded to Oracle. I think the competition will continue in terms of the specialized functions and the non-core functions of this activity.

Terry Gerton Jim, as you went through the research process here and you talked to vendors and you looked at technologies, what surprised you most about where this market is headed and what you heard?

Jim Cook I’m not sure if it was a surprise as much as it was something that was encouraging, was that the market is actually much larger than maybe some people imagine, certainly driven by a lot of changes in the, and development in the commercial space. One of the things that I think we were pleasantly surprised by was just the availability of solutions. Because again, our focus was on products and solutions, not services. The challenge in all of that is making sure that, or identifying those solutions that are federal government ready, meeting the unique data, security, interoperability standards of the federal government. And there were quite a few, certainly in some specialized areas, that were much further along and ready in that sense than in other cases. So I think that was a, if you want to use the term surprise, that was pleasant surprise that it is a robust marketplace. There are segments of the market that have federal ready solutions. And others that are moving in that direction fairly rapidly. So I think back to your earlier question about competition, it really does, I think, bode well for the fact that I think there is gonna be a lot of open competition in the market going forward, even with the unique requirements and needs of the federal government.

Terry Gerton So, Jim, is it your sense at this point that the OPM QSMO has a good handle on this market and reflecting the capabilities and the products that are out there?

Jim Cook I think that our hope is that this market research actually helps them do that. Again, one of the drivers for us was, and in our early discussions with OPM about the fact that we were doing this, is I think we both saw this as an opportunity to really jump start their efforts in developing this commercial marketplace set of solutions that they could make available to other agencies. So we’re looking forward to them hopefully adopting the content that we’ve provided to them and starting to use it. And we’ll continue to update and build it as the market continues to evolve and change.

Terry Gerton And Gary, if you’re an agency CHCO or CIO sitting out there getting ahold of this report, what do you want them to take away from it as they think about their own agency requirements, how they fit into this OPM strategy and what they should do with the data?

Gary Washington Well, I would recommend, you know, having been a department CIO myself previously, I would recommended they use this as a strategic guide for decision making as they move forward in an HR 2.0 journey. Obviously there’s going to be some requirements that have already been laid down for the core functions, but as you approach your non-core functions and you look at solutions, as Jim stated, know that there’s been work been done to assist you and your decision making to give you a strategic roadmap. I think it would be beneficial to all, hopefully, through using this information, that the outcome would be working together we would find efficiencies, cost savings, better streamline how we do HR functions across the federal government.

Terry Gerton And Jim, you led the report. What’s your hope for it?

Jim Cook Well, I would echo Gary’s remarks. I hope that it is found useful, not just to define the marketplace, but useful in accelerating the acquisition process. I think that also one of the key issues that you’ve raised in your questions is around competition. The goal here is to create an open marketplace, not the reverse. And we look forward to working with agencies and fielding questions and working with industry to continue to update this to encourage competition and support innovation in the federal HR space.