July 2012 Dice Report: Top 10 Tech Talent Gaps Print this post


Sourcing and hiring certain hard-to-find, skilled technology professionals continues to be a battle.

The most difficult to secure among today’s pool of tech candidates: Java developers, mobile developers, .NET developers and software developers. These, and many others on Dice’s list of top 10 difficult-to-find positions, have ranked high each time we’ve asked America’s tech hiring managers and recruiters for their toughest openings to fill.

This raises a particular question: Why isn’t the market fixing the talent gaps?

Find out what’s causing the same tech skills to stay in high demand and low supply, month after month.

Read the July 2012 Dice Report
.

About Kevin Studer

Kevin Studer is a Marketing Manager with Dice. Among his responsibilities are oversight of the company's email and direct mail programs, as well as the Employer Resource Center. Prior to joining Dice in 2005, Kevin worked in marketing communications in the insurance industry for Aviva USA and EMC National Life. When he's not at work, his free time is spent with his wife and two young daughters, or watching whatever football game is on TV.

Comments

  1. BY RealityCheckPlease says:

    Most candidates with heavy Java are from India. But they are all here on H1B visas – so suck it up and sponsor them or stop whining. I assume outsourcing created that gap to begin with: you reap what you sow. Mobile developers are another chapter in an old, old story. The same was true for C, then C++. You can’t have a whole new technology go from seedling to a forest in 2-3 years and expect to find candidates. How about training existing developers in Mobile? It’s got to be done eventually. Better to bit the bullet now that wait for a magic one to appear, because it isn’t going to happen.

Post a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title="" rel=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <pre> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>