You also said that America's success in the world economy depends more on the ability of its citizens to create value than on the competitiveness of U.S. companies. Why?

Because companies are rapidly going global. IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Oracle, Microsoft—every company that is in, or near, the IT sector is setting up shop abroad and doing research and development in China and India. Companies are selling and marketing abroad, and producing and manufacturing abroad. They are parking their savings abroad too; they are becoming global in terms of being global investors. The competitiveness of any place in the world, including a place called the United States, depends less and less on the profitability of companies headquartered in that location, and more and more on the capacity of the people that live there to add value to this increasingly integrated global economy. More Americans are working for companies that are headquartered outside the U.S. Nokia has a huge number of American employees. Toyota employs more Americans than Chrysler does. The nationality of the corporation is becoming less relevant. Far more relevant are the skill sets of the people within a geographic area or nation, and their capacity to continuously add greater and greater value.

Now, part of that responsibility for skills is up to the individual, to stay up-to-date. But part of that responsibility is a social and political responsibility. The geographic area must have world-class infrastructure: not just roads and bridges, but also a reliable energy grid. Access to broadband and good public schools is both a private- and public-sector responsibility.

Where should IT executives focus their attention in order to help their companies provide value?

I think IT executives, for their company's and shareholders' well-being, need to be assessing their employees' skills. They need to ensure that those skill sets are up-to-date, and that employees are able to work with one another both inside U.S. borders and also across borders, so they can generate even more value.

Today, there seem to dual anxieties in the IT workforce. IT workers fear the loss of their jobs, while IT executives fear they will not be able to find the people they need in the future. Which is the bigger problem?

The bigger challenge will be for IT executives to find the people they need. I don't see any reason to fear the loss of good IT jobs in the U.S. Every time the business cycle turns down I hear the same worries, and I've heard those worries for over 20 years. But every time the business cycle turns up again, IT professionals are once again employed and they get good jobs. The demand is rising faster than the supply; it's going to be harder and harder to get the quality of IT professional that American business needs.

Why is that?

Partly because of the increasing mythology among college students that IT is a risky profession. The mythology has also spread to engineering. Well, IT is risky. IT does go up and down with the business cycle, just like engineering goes up and down. The business cycle affects us all. The fact of the matter is that engineering jobs over the long term will do very well, and IT jobs over the long term will also do very well.

Next page: What if an IT worker's job is offshored?

1 | 2 | 3