Article Review #1: Technology proficiency observed in government and private workforce
Research summary
In “Behind the curve: technology challenges facing the homeland intelligence and counterterrorism workforce,“ Black et al. (2024) sought out to answer the question of how security agencies should respond and prepare their professionals for emerging threats posed by new technology. They then posing the research question, “How can DHS [Department of Homeland Security] receive consistent, updated, and relevant technology workforce training for their intelligence and counter terrorism professionals?” (Black et. al., 2024, p.1) Black et al. hypothesized that deficiency in training on addressing threats in emerging technologies decreases the readiness of DHS analysts.
Applied principles of social science
In conducting their survey, Black et al. demonstrated the principles of objectivity, parsimony, empiricism and ethical neutrality that were core concepts in Module 2. In their research, the team addressed and accounted for biases in their methodology by surveying both private and government employees of the DHS, as well as accounting for survey fatigue and unwillingness to offer up information due to fear of retribution or lack of incentive (Black et al., 2024, pp.5-6.). Black et al. began their paper by defining competency and what a gap in competency is in pages 2-4 of their paper in order to establish their findings. By considering these factors that would affect their research results, the team demonstrated objectivity and parsimony. The survey used empirical data that was both qualitative and quantitative, drawing conclusion from survey response as well as archival research data on training (Black et al., 2024, p.5). It is important to note that although Black et al. did not make any unsupported claims without data, their ethical neutrality in their research can still be called into question due to their funding from DHS, which they acknowledged in the paper (Black et al., 2024, p.10). To this concern, their findings do not unfairly put government employees at an advantage over private sector employees and by doing this the research team demonstrates ethical neutrality in examining both groups in their research process.
Research methods and challenges
The research methods that Black et al. used were both qualitative and quantitative research methods. The team used a multi-method approach using survey data as well archival research to come to their conclusions, both research methods that we went over in class in Module 3. Quantitative data was provided in the form of industry and technological standards and past research. Archival data in the research was used by the team to identify what kind of training and training programs were available to both government and private employees and evaluating them (Black et al., 2024, p.1). Quantitative and qualitative data was also collected in the form of numerical questions and open ended questions posed to the survey participants (Black et al., 2024, p.5). The challenges that the team faced when conducting their research was “the lack of standard definitions” (Black et al., 2024, p.2) of competency in private and government sectors. In module 5, we learned that cybersecurity professional requirements vary across occupation. This was a challenge to the researchers because government professionals had different requirements than private sector professionals. Black et al. also found that although Government analysts had NICE and NIST frameworks they lacked clear roadmaps and were not aware of CISA training available to them (Black et al., 2024, pp.6-7). In collecting data, it was also harder for the team to obtain surveys from government professionals due to workload and unwillingness to elect information. Another potential issue with the survey gathering was the sample size and survey response distribution. The survey only covered 114 individuals of which 70 responded, 67% were government sector and 32% were private sector (Black et al., 2024, p.5).
Conclusion and impact to society
Despite the challenges in research that Black et al. faced, they addressed the issues they encountered by utilizing the results from combined data analysis in addition to their survey. Although their survey had limited size and scope, it successfully answered the research question they had initially posed. On marginalized groups, the research findings do not relate to marginalized groups, but rather the difference in training and competence of private sector and government professionals. Finding that the private sector led the government sector in competency, The team suggested that DHS should increase required training time allocation and invest in technology and RND in order to increase “speed and agility” (Black et al., 2024, p.9). As a result, Black et al. findings will be relevant and impactful to DHS as well as the rest of the defense sector and other intelligence and counterterrorist agencies. By bringing to deficiencies in their training program and materials, reform in their methods can improve their professionals’ level of knowledge allowing a more proficient government workforce in intelligence and counterterrorism to be formed. By working with the government industry in improving their programs, the private industry also stands to benefit in cross training and government engagement with their technology.
REFERENCES
Black, M., Obradovic, L., & House, D. (2024). Behind the curve: technology challenges facing the homeland intelligence and counterterrorism workforce. Journal of Cybersecurity, 10(1), https://doi.org/10.1093/cybsec/tyae002