"Technology Sector Sheds 282,000 jobs in 2002"

You may have seen this article. When it appeared on MSNBC-TV and other sites I heard a collective shiver from the IT community. Those desiring to break into IT saw this as the kiss of death. Those already in it wondered if their job was next.

On discussion forums a myriad of panic-stricken folks bemoaned the end of the tech sector. They blamed Al Qaeda, Iraq, President Bush, India, newbies, and incompetent management. Many indicated that they were going back into accounting, retail, manufacturing, and even petty theft.

It's not that I don't sympathize. It isn't that I don't understand the struggle. However, let's make sure we keep some perspective. Just a bit; too much perspective is as crippling as too little.

282,000 does not equal net 282,000
I know, you think reverting back to that whole "new math" debacle of the 80s. Au contraire. First, you have to understand that although 282,000 jobs were "lost", the work required was not. Many companies drop head count and then outsource. It creates fluid cash flow and does an amazing thing to their books.

Full-time employees are a fixed cost, week after week. Contractors and outsourcing engagements are variable costs – here today, gone tomorrow. I know of four programmers who were let go this past year, they are part of that 282,000. However, unreported and more difficult to track is that each of them was offered a full- or part-time contract at a higher hourly rate.

Now, that still doesn't renounce the fact we're in a negative economic cycle. I just want to point out why the "funny" math is important. Given the opportunity each of those four programmers mentioned above would rather have the "security" of their old position: We will overlook the interesting definition of "security" their situation creates.

Secondarily, the times, they are a changin'. This, by the way, is always the case. Yes, the times are changing. Companies are outsourcing – and not just to India – more than ever. We are entering a time of extreme fluidity in the IT sector. What does that mean?

Companies are interested in hiring talent, not people. Yes, I know the talent comes in the form of people, but hear me out. They will hire staff technologists for day to day maintenance and help desk but many new projects will go to project teams hired for the skill and then disbanded when not needed. Companies have figure out that paying for performance is better than paying for training and unproven commodities.

So what does that mean?

Simply this: If you wish to take part in what author Bruce Tulgan refers to as "The Talent Wars", you had better get some talent. I know, you're stuck in the "need experience to get experience" dilemma. Here is my advice:

First, learn transcendent skills, those that are not tied to a given technology. Communication: Written and verbal, and conceptual business knowledge are good places to start.

Second, understand that new technology is rarely new. Take conceptual knowledge from one technology to the other so you are not relearning everything from scratch. In short, all operating systems are the same, all hardware platforms are the same. I know there are purists who will take exception to that, but those who adopt this way of thinking create many more options and opportunities for themselves.

– Matthew Moran is an author and technology consultant based in Scottsdale, Ariz. His unique focus and approach to consulting – Concept Over Process – has helped him develop business solutions for a variety of industries and companies. He has developed, "The IT Career Builder's Seminar," and its companion book, "The IT Career Builder's Toolkit: The Insider's Guide to Building Your Technology Career in Any Economy."