Talking Talent

As the growth rates of emerging markets continue to accelerate and further expand beyond the current leaders – Brazil, Russia, India and China – the power of these regions in the global IT industry is becoming more pronounced.

Gartner estimates that IT spending in emerging markets will grow at a compound annual growth rate of 9.9 per cent to reach $1.3 trillion by 2011.  In comparison, mature markets will spend more overall ($2.5 trillion by 2011) but invest a smaller percentage (4.6 per cent).

And with the rapid rise in IT growth in emerging nations, analysts are predicting that the global ICT industry will be ‘borderless’ by 2015.  This means that organisations, including governments, will increasingly source their ICT from around the globe without regard to the ‘country of origin’ or ‘headquarters’ of the vendor supplying the solution, be it software, hardware, telecommunications, IT services, or people.

It’s fair to say that Australia will have more to worry about than simply how well our rowers and cyclists perform by the time London 2012 rolls around.

As organisations leverage low-cost, highly skilled labour sources, nations such as Australia will be at a significant competitive disadvantage unless we find a distinct value proposition. 

Functions which can be digitised or automated are most likely to be sent offshore, so building those skills which are valuable locally and less easy to replicate are crucial to underwrite Australia’s economic prosperity.

As the WEF report clearly demonstrates, those countries leading the world in ICT readiness have a coherent government vision of the importance of ICT, coupled with an early focus on education and innovation.

Australia possesses an abundantly-skilled, culturally and linguistically diverse workforce that excels in high value, creative problem-solving skills.  Our people have a reputation around the globe for their ability to develop integrated business solutions through applied ICT technology. 

But, just like the Aussie stars of the track and pool, our people need nurturing.  We have the capacity to develop world-beating ICT products and solutions – but we need support, investment and incentives to ensure we keep our place up the front of the pack.

As the Olympics circus packs up its tent for another four years, sports-mad Australians are left to contemplate a lighter medal haul than anticipated, alongside a sinking spot on the medal tally board.

While our less-than-impressive efforts at the velodrome and on the track have us shaking our heads, the British press are singing the praises of Old Blighty, pointing out that their athletes had shown “what can be achieved with dedication, good coaching and sensible funding”.

And there’s the rub.  Should we really be surprised when a massive financial investment in sport yields results?  And should we marvel when economic powerhouses such as China, with its huge population, and the US, with its combination of high Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and population, top the medal table? 

A high population provides a strong base from which to draw talent – whether it’s athletes or technologists.  GDP is a good indicator of a country’s prosperity, with affluent countries more likely to have the spare cash to invest in elite sports systems (or technology infrastructure, as the case may be).

But my question is this: will Australians ever experience the same sense of bruised national pride as we slip further down the global technology leader board?

There are dozens of ways to measure the competitiveness of a country’s ICT capacity, but the Global Information Technology Report, released by the World Economic Forum (WEF) in April is a good yardstick. 

The Report uses the Networked Readiness Index (NRI), covering a total of 127 economies in 2007-2008, to measure each nation’s degree of preparation to participate in and benefit from ICT developments.  The NRI assesses the economy’s ICT environment, readiness of key stakeholders and ICT usage.

And, according to WEF, Australia is nowhere near medal contention.

Top of the league this year was Denmark – which won only two gold at Beijing, but grabbed the WEF gold for the second year in a row.  Close behind was Sweden (despite just four silver medals and a bronze in Beijing), Switzerland (two gold medals), the United States (runner up at the Olympics, with 36 gold medals) and Singapore (just one silver medal). Australia came in at number 14.

So, what’s more important for our future success?  Is it golden moments in the pool or world-beating high technology performances?