Public Sector: Building Internal IT Capacity Requires Independent Technical Validation

The current software development model in Quebec's and Canada's public sector relies heavily on external firms. The majority of public organizations have limited internal capacity to design, develop, and maintain their own systems.

This reality is not new. But the consequences are worsening as digital becomes central to the delivery of public services. The good news: a movement toward insourcing IT capabilities is underway. The critical question: how do you ensure that code produced by new internal teams meets contractual requirements and quality standards?

The Challenges of Limited Internal Capacity

When internal software development capacity is insufficient, several challenges emerge beyond direct costs:

Insufficient knowledge transfer: when projects end, institutional knowledge is not always effectively transferred. The organization progressively loses mastery of its own systems.
Technology rigidity: without sufficient internal expertise, technology choices become difficult to reassess. Systems may evolve according to specific practices rather than open standards.
Reduced agility: the smallest change requires a contractual process, a rate negotiation, and a mobilization delay. The organization cannot respond quickly to user needs.
Evaluation difficulty: without internal capacity to validate the real complexity of a request, the organization lacks benchmarks to assess estimates and scope changes.

The Digital Skills Gap: A Quebec and Canadian Reality

The digital skills gap in the public sector is extensively documented in Quebec and Canada:

The SFPQ summarized the Gallant Commission's findings in February 2026: “the public service as a whole suffers from a recurring deficit in internal IT resources.” Even more damning: “the skyrocketing cost of projects is directly attributable to the shortage of IT workers.”
The Quebec Auditor General has warned for 20 years that “frequent outsourcing can, over time, lead to the stagnation of internal expertise, or its outright loss.” The internal expertise deficit creates a vicious cycle of dependency.
Federally, according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, outsourced IT services cost 22 to 26% more than if delivered in-house, a powerful economic incentive for insourcing IT capabilities.

Insourcing Is Underway — But the Transition Creates New Risks

The movement toward greater internal capacity is not theoretical. Public organizations are investing in recruiting, training, and equipping their teams. This is a necessary and desirable endeavor.

But this transition period creates specific risks that are often underestimated:

New teams, immature processes: recently recruited developers do not yet have experience with the organization's specific context. Internal development processes are still being built.
Unproven technologies: the move to new technologies, even when justified, introduces a learning curve and technical risks that only experience reveals.
Standards still being defined: quality, security, and architecture standards are not yet stabilized. Deliverables are being produced before the reference frameworks are finalized.
Lack of perspective: when everyone is new to the process, who has the perspective needed to identify gaps before they become problems?

Code produced by new internal teams requires independent validation just as much as code produced by external vendors. The source of the code changes; the need for verification remains the same.

Production Accelerates, Verification Must Follow

According to a GitHub study, Copilot users complete coding tasks 55% faster. The acceleration of code production is a documented fact, but technology alone does not guarantee quality.

This means that even with powerful tools, the quality of the outcome fundamentally depends on the rigor of validation processes. The faster you produce, the more you need solid and independent verification mechanisms.

A Progressive Strategy with Validation at Every Stage

Rebuilding internal capacity is a medium- to long-term endeavor. The strategy must be progressive and realistic, and every phase must include independent technical validation:

Phase 1 — Scoping: define measurable and verifiable requirements before building begins. Independent technical validation starts here.
Phase 2 — Experimentation: start with low-risk projects. Validate that deliverables produced by new teams meet the defined requirements.
Phase 3 — Capacity building: as teams take on more critical systems, independent verification becomes even more important.
Phase 4 — Validated autonomy: the organization masters its own systems, but maintains independent validation as a permanent safety net.

V.I.A.'s Response: Validation at Every Stage of the Transition

At V.I.A. Solutions, our independent technical validation services are designed to support this transition without substituting for the teams:

Our Strategic Scoping intervenes upstream to define clear, measurable needs. Our Technical Contract Diagnosis validates that requirements are verifiable, that acceptance criteria are clear, and that quality standards are defined, whether code is produced internally or by an external vendor.

Our AI Strategy & Governance service guides organizations through the adoption of advanced development tools and processes, with an implementation plan adapted to their organizational reality. New internal teams benefit from an objective external perspective that identifies gaps before they become problems, without interfering in their daily work.

The future of the digital public sector will come from organizations that are more capable and more autonomous. But that autonomy is built on solid foundations, and solid foundations require independent validation at every stage.