How to Hire Technologists: A Guide for State Enforcers

Technology is increasingly central to the work of enforcement agencies. Understanding how AI, big data, product design, and other technical systems shape markets and can harm Americans is essential to casework and research. Technologists help enforcers meet this challenge by guiding investigations, navigating policy, analyzing data, and translating complex technical concepts for non-technical colleagues.

Previous guides explain how technologists can support investigations and when to bring them into casework. This guide provides step-by-step instructions on how to hire technologists for investigative work.

What are Technologists?

Government agencies often associate technologists with IT and digital services—maintaining systems, cybersecurity, and agency technology. These roles are essential to operations.

However, this guide focuses on a different kind of technologist: experts who contribute directly to the work of an enforcement agency. These technologists work alongside attorneys, economists, investigators, policy analysts, and other professionals to hold companies accountable and ensure fair, competitive, and safe markets. They apply their technical expertise to investigations, research, and other mission-critical functions that promote competition and protect the public.

Technologists can support investigations using their expertise in the following ways:

• Software engineering - Examine how a company’s backend systems, APIs, or algorithms actually operate to help the case team understand how a product makes decisions or handles data.
• Design - Analyze user interfaces and flows, identify dark patterns and confusing disclosures to determine whether users are being misled, nudged, or steered in ways that undermine consent or choice.
• Research and Tech Policy - Conduct market scans to ground legal theories in real-world technical and market context.
• Product - Analyze internal product documents (roadmaps, metrics, A/B test results) to understand business incentives, decision-making, and tradeoffs that may relate to alleged harms.
• Data - Evaluate large datasets produced in discovery to identify patterns, disparities, or anomalies relevant to enforcement.

These technologists are not hired to provide IT support, manage internal systems, build public-facing digital tools, or deliver automation for internal workflows. Instead, they bring technical insight to complex investigative and policy questions—for example, identifying how a platform’s design misleads users, uncovering algorithmic discrimination, or assessing how a company’s data practices harm people.

Your hiring process should aim to attract technologists excited to use their expertise in this substantive, mission-driven way. Those interested in building or maintaining technology systems may be a better fit for your agency’s IT department.

Writing the Job Description

The downloadable job description outlines sample duties across four key areas:

• Doing the Work – Applying technical expertise directly to investigations, research, and program implementation.
• Understanding the Market – Monitoring emerging technologies and digital market trends to anticipate risks and opportunities.
• Collaborating Internally – Working across the organization to embed technical expertise in core mission areas.
• Building External Partnerships – Developing and sustaining relationships that strengthen the agency’s technical capacity and impact.

The responsibilities and competencies should be adapted to fit your organization’s needs.

Assessing Technical Talent

When assessing technical talent for enforcement roles, the goal is not to assess applicants’ knowledge of the law or public policy. Those skills will develop in time as they work your attorneys and investigators. Instead, focus on their technical skills, their willingness to apply those skills in unfamiliar contexts, and their ability to collaborate effectively with colleagues from different disciplines and backgrounds.

Reviewing a Resume

When screening for technical talent for enforcement roles, prioritize candidates with experience personally doing the work—not just project, program or vendor management. Look for:

Software Engineering

Experience building, maintaining, or improving software systems.

Example projects to look for:

• Wrote, tested, or maintained production code
• Built or significantly modified applications, services, or system components
• Implemented security, authentication, or fraud-prevention features
• Diagnosed and fixed bugs, outages, or performance issues

Possible degrees: Computer Science, Software Engineering, Computer Engineering

Possible job titles: Software Engineer, Backend Developer, Front-End Developer, Full-Stack Developer, Security Engineer, Systems Engineer

Design
Experience designing digital products that meet user needs.

Example projects to look for:

• Designed screens, flows, or interactions for digital products
• Conducted user interviews, testing sessions, or usability reviews
• Iterated on designs based on direct user feedback
• Produced design artifacts (wireframes, prototypes, usability findings)

Possible degrees: Design, Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), Psychology, Cognitive Science, Anthropology

Possible job titles: UX Designer, Product Designer, Interaction Designer, User Researcher, Service Designer

Research and Policy
Experience producing research or deep analysis about how technology works.

Example projects to look for:

• Conducted research, analysis, or evaluations
• Wrote reports, memos, or briefs grounded in original findings
• Collected and analyzed qualitative or quantitative data
• Developed conclusions or recommendations based on evidence

Possible degrees: Public Policy, Economics, Political Science, Sociology, Information Science, Journalism

Possible job titles: Policy Analyst, Research Analyst, Technology Policy Researcher, Data Journalist

Product

Experience shaping and delivering technical products—not just managing the process.

Example projects to look for:

• Defined product goals, requirements, or success metrics
• Made prioritization decisions based on user needs and constraints
• Worked directly with engineers and designers to ship features
• Took responsibility for outcomes, not just timelines

Possible degrees: Computer Science, Information Systems, Business, Business Information Management

Possible job titles: Product Manager, Technical Product Manager, Product Owner, Product Lead

Data

Experience working with large amounts of data using code.

Example projects to look for:

• Analyzed large or complex datasets using scripting or computational languages (e.g., Python, R, SQL)
• Wrote code to collect, clean, join, or validate data from multiple sources
• Built data pipelines or structured datasets to support analysis or modeling
• Developed statistical analyses or models to answer substantive questions
• Worked directly with raw data to ensure it was fit for purpose and aligned with project goals

Possible degrees: Data Science, Statistics, Computer Science, Mathematics, Engineering

Possible job titles: Data Scientist, Data Engineer, Machine Learning Engineer, Applied Scientist

Minimum Qualifications

Candidates should demonstrate the following minimum qualifications:

• Experience executing or leading technology projects using skills in software engineering, design, product management, data science, or research.
• Experience using data, research, or user insights to identify novel problems and develop solutions.
• Ability to translate technical concepts for non-technical colleagues and contribute to shared organizational goals. 

Designing a Simulation Exercise

Instead of relying on an applicant’s self-assessment, design a simulation that mirrors the work a technologist would do in your agency. The goal is to assess how they apply their technical expertise—not their legal or policy knowledge—to realistic scenarios. 

If your agency investigates data breaches or harmful data practices, for example, you can create a single scenario that all disciplines can respond to. The scenario might involve unexpected data sharing, insecure storage, confusing user flows, or a system behaving in ways the company did not fully understand. The key is to craft a situation where a software engineer, data scientist, UX designer, product manager, or researcher could each apply their expertise to diagnose what happened, identify what additional information they would need, and recommend steps to reduce future risk. Candidates could be asked to:

• Prepare questions they would ask the company to understand how its technology operates and may have contributed to harm.
• Describe what technical evidence they would request to better understand the issue.
• Identify what further research or data would help clarify the situation.
• Propose changes the company should make to reduce the likelihood of similar problems in the future.

Responses should reflect the candidate’s discipline: a designer might reference wireframes or user flows; a product manager could examine product goals that contributed to the problem. An over-reliance on legal or policy arguments may signal a lack of technical, hands-on skills or that generative AI, rather than the candidate’s expertise, was used to draft the answer.

Interviewing Candidates

Interviews are an opportunity to assess qualities that go beyond technical expertise—such as collaboration, curiosity, service mindset, and initiative. To get meaningful insights, consider asking questions that invite candidates to share specific examples:

• Tell us about a time you failed. What happened, and what did you do next? (Reveals resilience, learning approach, and self-awareness.)
• Tell us about a time you encouraged others to take a chance on a new project or idea. (Shows how they influence, lead, and inspire buy-in.)
• Is there something you’re currently worried about in the marketplace that you’d be eager to tackle in this role? (Tests how they spot and evaluate complex technical issues.)
• Describe a time when you worked with people from very different professional backgrounds. What did you do to ensure mutual understanding and respect? (Assesses cross-disciplinary collaboration skills.)
• Share an example of when you had to quickly learn about a new technology or market trend. How did you get up to speed, and what was the outcome? (Demonstrates adaptability and learning agility.)

These questions can be challenging to answer on the spot. Consider sending them to candidates in advance so they can prepare strong examples. To assess their ability to think on their feet, develop follow-up questions tailored to each prompt.

Posting your Job

Thousands of experienced technologists and technical public servants are currently looking for meaningful opportunities to serve. To reach them, post your openings on platforms that connect mission-driven talent with public sector roles:

• #PublicSectorJobBoard – A weekly digest curated by Rebecca Heywood that highlights job opportunities across government, civic tech, and public-interest organizations.
• Tech Jobs for Good – A job board featuring mission-driven technology roles at nonprofits, governments, and social-impact organizations.
• Civic Match – A nonpartisan program that matches experienced professionals with short- and long-term roles in state and local governments nationwide.
• Government Works – A newsletter focused on improving how government operates, which also shares weekly job and internship opportunities in the public sector.

Common Myths About Hiring Technologists

Myth: “We don’t have the ability to pay technologists enough.”

Technologists who choose public service are rarely motivated by salary alone. They deserve a fair, competitive wage, but most are drawn to these roles because they have seen firsthand how technology can harm the public and want to fix it. They are motivated by impact, mission, and the opportunity to contribute where technologists are rare—not by compensation.

Myth: “A technologist must know our laws or policies before joining.”

Technologists don’t need to show up understanding the applicable laws your organization uses or how to apply a specific legal theory. You already have that expertise. What you need is their deep understanding of technical concepts, systemic thinking, and willingness to collaborate across disciplines. Policy can be taught.

Myth: “We contract outside experts; having a technologist on staff won’t make a difference.”

Relying solely on outside experts means technical expertise is only brought in when you know to ask for it. In-house technologists surface issues early, spot patterns, and identify where technology is playing a role—even when it’s not obvious. They can also reduce costs by eliminating the need for repeated hourly consulting. Technologists often accelerate investigations and policymaking by helping teams ask the right questions, interpret evidence, avoid dead ends, and strengthen cases from the outset.

Myth: “A technologist needs a technical degree.”

Technical careers rarely follow a single, linear path. Many strong technologists build their skills through hands-on work, not formal degrees, and some enter the field through entirely nontraditional routes. A degree alone doesn’t tell you whether someone can actually do the work. That’s why governments are increasingly moving toward skills-based hiring—prioritizing relevant experience and demonstrated expertise over credentials. When reviewing candidates, focus on what they’ve built, analyzed, or delivered, not just where they went to school. The degrees listed above are included only as examples of common backgrounds, not as hiring requirements.

Myth: “We need a robust team of technologists.”

Sure, that would be great, but technologists drawn to this type of public service are comfortable going where they are rare. They expect to be embedded with lawyers, investigators, and policy teams—and are eager to take on complex, ambiguous problems. Most are self-starters who don’t need a large team to be effective. Many agencies see immediate value from a single technologist through sharper questions, clearer analysis, and faster understanding of how technology contributes to harm.

Myth: “We don’t have an active case against Big Tech.”

Nearly every modern market—from healthcare to housing to transportation—is shaped by technology. Even if you are not investigating a major tech company, your cases are still technical. Hiring technologists helps agencies understand how companies use technology, anticipate harm, and stay ahead of emerging issues.

Myth: “We should wait until a tech-heavy case comes in before we hire.”

If you wait until a major case arrives, it’s already too late. Building internal capacity now ensures you have the expertise to recognize problems early, preserve evidence properly, and act when needed.

--

Elizabeth Bond is a Visiting Tech Fellow at Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy and leads transformation efforts at the North Carolina Division of Motor Vehicles. She previously served as Senior Advisor for Emerging Technology at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, where she helped build a team of technologists focused on Big Tech’s role in financial products and led efforts to streamline technical hiring across the federal government by creating a shared application pipeline for multiple enforcement agencies.