UK Govt Data People Not Technical, Says Ex-Downing St Data Science Head

An anonymous reader shares a report: A former director of data science at the UK prime minister's office has told MPs that people working with data in government are not typically technical and would be unlikely to get a similar job in the private sector.

In a hearing designed to illuminate the challenges facing the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) as it strives to become the digital centre for government, MPs quizzed Laura Gilbert, head of AI for Government, at the Ellison Institute and former director of data science at 10 Downing Street, the prime ministers' office.

Members of the House of Common's Science, Innovation and Technology Committee wanted to know about the performance of the Government Digital Service, which in January was moved from the Cabinet Office to DSIT and merged with Central Digital and Data Office (CDDO), the Incubator for AI (i.AI). Gilbert, a particle physicist who has worked in a number of tech industry roles, said one of the challenges was understanding the level of tech skills in the civil service in central government.

Not Surprising at All. That is Britain.

[GFS666]

From everything I have read, Britain, more than most countries, puts in charge non-technical people who are totally unqualified for either leadership or their positions. I suspect this has something to do with their "Lords/peasants" society/history, but there are probably people who frequent this Website that could enlighten us for the reasons much better than me. I'll just relate what happened to Reginald Victor (known as R.V.) Jones. He became the head of British MI6 Scientific Intelligence/Investigation

Re: Not Surprising at All. That is Britain.

[Viol8]

Politics and the civil service are one of the few places you can have a career having done fairly useless degrees such as PPE. If you've got a technical or scientific qualification you can do a lot better salary and job satisfaction wise in the private sector.

Re:

[Zocalo]

Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. The really inept get into politics.

Re:

[serviscope_minor]

Winning upper class twit of the year is still an important qualification, worth more than any science, engineering or maths degree. Plus there is a fierce streak on anti intellectualism here for technical subjects. You get the piss taken for being a spod at school and people will almost brag about being bad at maths or computers.

Re:

[ceoyoyo]

The US seems to vacillate between putting generals and actors in charge, with an occasional lawyer sneaking in. It's not a new phenomenon.

Same in Canada

[itamblyn]

This is what I have observed in Canada as well. Positions are being filled by people with surprisingly few technical skills. This isn't to say that there aren't technical people in government, but it seems like the hiring process doesn't adequately test for core technical competencies.

The private sector is no different . . .

[OnTheEdge]

After 15 years at a Fortune 5 company, I can tell you most people working with data in the private sector don't know well what they are doing, either.

Just like "Yes, Minister"

[business_kid]

Actually, the situation is just like 'Humphrey' explained in "Yes Minister." You keep Managers who understand a subject away from managing that area, because they'd want to get involved and do things. You appoint someone who knows nothing so he/she can just "manage."

Except in this case, they've done it with the workers too! But seriously - what girl/guy at IT Manager level would spend the rest of his life sinking his toe into the very large & soft a&ses in the Civil Service? The one suitable guy

Let's presume...

[Togamika]

...you get what you paid for