Guest Post By Another Frustrated but Hopeful Anonymous DTI Insider
The recent op-ed published in Delaware Liberal paints a damning picture of the Department of Technology and Information (DTI). While it is true that DTI is not without its flaws, the piece leans heavily on hyperbole, personal attacks, and omissions that make it easy for leadership to dismiss. I want to offer a more balanced and fact-based perspective, one that does not let DTI leadership off the hook but also does not discredit the agency’s hard-working employees who make the best of a difficult situation.
Clarifications on Personal Claims
Some of the claims made about internal hiring decisions are misleading. For example, the previous op-ed implied that the Chief Operating Officer’s wife was unfairly promoted. In reality, she has been with DTI for over 15 years, worked in various roles, and had to continue fulfilling the responsibilities of her previous position until a backfill was found. Another employee accused of being appointed to a role after less than a year at DTI has actually worked with the state for over a decade and was appointed to a new Director role while still maintaining their previous Director role due to ongoing staffing shortages. Suggesting otherwise ignores the reality that many employees in leadership roles at DTI must wear multiple hats due to staffing shortages.
The Real Issue: Chronic Underfunding
The main issue with DTI is not corruption or incompetence—it is systemic underfunding. Since its inception over 20 years ago, DTI has taken on more and more responsibilities without the legislative support needed to match its expanding mandate. However, this is not an excuse for inefficiency. Every state agency faces funding and staffing constraints; the real test is how effectively leadership can deliver services with the resources available.
To DTI’s credit, the agency often makes the difficult task of keeping state systems running look easy. However, the reality is that technology infrastructure requires ongoing investment, and much of DTI’s work is invisible to those who do not understand the complexity of maintaining secure, efficient IT systems across state government.
DTI’s Political Handicaps
DTI’s struggles are exacerbated by two major political disadvantages:
A Lack of Political Clout – Unlike the Department of Education or DelDOT, DTI does not wield significant influence within the General Assembly. The current CIO, having come from the private sector, clearly lacks political instincts, political maneuverability, or the desire to politic. This results in a dynamic where legislators treat DTI leadership as lucky to even be confirmed, rather than as a critical voice in the Governor’s Cabinet.
Low Public Visibility – Because DTI does not provide direct public services, it is shielded from scrutiny but also deprived of political capital. Agencies like the Department of Health and Social Services can leverage public opinion to demand funding; DTI does not have that advantage. Legislators live and die by public perception, and because the average Delawarean is unaware of DTI’s impact, there is little incentive for lawmakers to prioritize its needs.
This is indicative of a broader leadership issue within DTI, spanning from the Chief level to Directors and Managers. The prevailing notion of a “good leader” often falls into one of two categories: someone who has been with the agency since before sliced bread was invented or someone with extensive technical expertise. Unfortunately, little to no value is placed on actual leadership skills or on fostering relationships with legislators to advocate for DTI’s needs. Leadership development within DTI is virtually nonexistent—not because the agency lacks the time to develop its employees, but because it lacks the knowledge and strategy to do so effectively.
Legislative Indifference or Calculated Silence?
The previous op-ed claimed that letters were sent to Delaware legislators detailing DTI’s failures, yet these concerns were not raised during the CIO’s confirmation hearing (Editor’s Note: I wondered about this myself.) This could mean one of two things: either legislators did not find the claims credible enough to act on, or—more concerningly—they are waiting for the upcoming Joint Finance Committee (JFC) hearings to launch a more strategic, partisan rebuke. If the latter is true, DTI leadership should brace for a reckoning.
The SEUS Controversy: A Management, Not Malice, Issue
One of the loudest criticisms in the original op-ed was about the SEUS cost recovery initiative, which resulted in agencies being charged for services they did not explicitly request. This was indeed a poorly handled rollout that damaged DTI’s credibility with other state agencies. However, it is incorrect to frame this as deliberate malfeasance—it was a mismanaged financial recovery effort driven by the need to address years of unbilled IT services. Transparency and better communication could have prevented the backlash, and DTI leadership should own this failure rather than dismiss agency frustrations as resistance to change.
The Delaware Liberal as a Safe Space for Employee Grievances
One of the most revealing aspects of this situation is that Delaware Liberal has become a more comfortable platform for DTI employees to voice concerns than any internal mechanism within the agency. This reflects a deeper issue: the absence of a meaningful feedback loop between leadership and staff. DTI leadership frequently holds conferences and discussion forums, but these often result in circular discussions that yield no real outcomes rather than tangible change.
If DTI wants to improve morale and rebuild trust, leadership must:
Reinstate Customer Satisfaction Surveys – These were quietly discontinued after agencies reported more frustration with DTI leadership than with frontline employees. Honest feedback must be welcomed, not avoided.
Implement an Anonymous Employee Survey – Before another op-ed drops with more damaging allegations, DTI should proactively solicit employee feedback in a way that ensures anonymity and encourages candid responses.
Prioritize Transparency Over Optics – Leadership must stop relying on performative initiatives that generate discussion but produce little real change. Employees and agency partners need to see action, not just rhetoric.
I know for a fact that members of DTI leadership read the previous op-ed. I hope they take this one just as seriously. Employees are speaking out because they care, not because they want to see the agency fail. If DTI leadership does not take proactive steps to address internal and external frustrations, it risks further eroding trust at a time when its credibility is already being questioned.
DTI has the talent and potential to be a leading technology agency, but that requires self-awareness, adaptability, and a willingness to listen. The next move is on leadership. Employees are watching, and so, it seems, are legislators.
Thanks Delaware Liberal for giving yet another DTI employee a voice. I believe many others from DTI will be writing in as well until DTI comes up with more initiatives aimed at its leadership being transparent toward its employees in a way that takes ownership and doesn’t seek to shirk responsibility through having an endless amount of leadership conferences and other forums that generate much conversation but lead to only more surface-level discussions without meaningful change.