Leveragingthe GigEconomy toAugment IT StaffinHigherEd

Higher Education has shown itself to be susceptible to the “great resignation” or “greatreshuffle” occurring in the wake of the COVI19 pandemic. The effects of this process have beensignificant but not uniformly distributed as some job types have demonstrated higher rates of turnover, in particular in-demand technical skill sets within Information Technology(IT). IT staff areleaving to take roles that offer significant salary increases as well as greater flexibility and progression opportunities.

Compounding the problem of experienced staff leaving is the lack of qualified applicants applying for vacant positions. Positions that would once attractd ozens of candidates are seeing zero applications, orat best a handful that barely meet minimum qualifications. One reason for this phenomenon is that asignificant number of individuals are pursuing free lance  work  in lieu of full-time employment.

While not a traditional approach in Higher Ed, augmenting staff with freelancers forming the“gig economy” is becoming an increasingly attractive option considering contemporary recruitment and retention issues. Bringing freelance staff onboard provides flexible and agile resources that can beutilized to address specific project needs or technical skillsets that are compromised due to full timestaff turnover. One of its great advantages is in allowing an institution to quickly identify, vet, and hire aworker with the specific abilities needed at an exact point in time. This relieves the internal pressure on training and building depth of bench around skills which maybe  hard to find or not required year-round. Organizations looking to utilize this model will need to be aware of the direct and indirect costs, becognizant of where these resources are best utilized, and ensure that proper engagement managementis inplace.

A variety of online marketplaces exist to facilitate connecting freelance technical staff withorganizations looking for hourly/weekly/monthly or project-based engagements. Direct costs can rangefrom $20-$180+ per hour, with more experienced participants and in-demand abilities commanding thehigherendofthe scale.Market place fees and retainer structures also impact direct cost, but these costs are offset by reduced institutional overhead in paying benefits, providing equipment, and in some case sallo cating physical space. The flexibility to start and stop these short-term engagements as demand andbudget permits allows for a more granular level of budgetary control as well as the ability to readily tiecosts to specific programs, projects, or services. This level of transparency is often difficult for institutions to attainand presents anopportunity to better articulate IT costs across the board.

Expectations around the effectiveness of gig worker resources must also be carefully managed in order to control in direct costs. While a fre elancer may bring years of experience to the engagement, time will still need to be invested to educate the masto specifics of the institution’s environment.

Quality control must be maintained which will often require internal review if not outright control ofwhen and how changes are moved into production environments. Circumstances will vary but it Is important to identify and articulate the operating and opportunity cost of allocating limited internalre sources to engaging and man aging the work of a free lancer. This factor be comes increasingly criticalas freelancers turn over frequently and the same one may not be utilized over multiple engagements.

Additional indirect costs exist in the limitations it creates in building institutional knowledge asthe freelancer will take much of what they have learned with them as they leave for their nextengagement. Good documentation and knowledge sharing with internal staff helps offset this, but onlyif built into the agreement and properly overseen to ensure it meets expectations. In a similar fashion,the high-rotation/high-volume world of a freelance worker makes loyalty to the institution and bondingwithin the team difficult. While not a required construct, loyalty and connection to an organization facilitates better results from all parties. Sending some institution al swagaspart of the engagement and spending time around the intrinsic valueofthework during onboardingmaypaydividends.

Another area to address in effective usage of freelance workers is in lowering institutionalbarriers of entry. This necessitates rethinking historic and outmoded ways of operating to facilitate thespeed and agility that is the hallmark of these engagements. While core precepts of confidentiality andsecurity must never be violated, finding opportunities to reduce or remove obstacles in procuring, onboarding, training, and managing these workers willl ower cost and increase efficiency. Some of these will requireconversationswithandpolicychangesfrompartnersinHumanResourcesandContracts&