Really nicely laid-out thoughts around this topic Alix! It is hard sometimes to put your finger on what exactly it is that is failing when you are in the midst of it. Seeing companies get Chief Digital Officers that come and upend entire processes, saying things like "some people won't like the changes" but there is very empathy in supporting those around the shift and how the shift brings up all of these issues with implicit rules which are either now hardcoded or which are not, and as a result, completely break the process. It is particularly hard for those who are on the loosing end of the power imbalances, who have been pointing these out for a while, and who now have to grapple with it as the person with power has no idea what to do with everything that is surfacing!
"This is also why automation and inference is so scary — the people, organisations, and states who want to leapfrog to automation and inference (rather than slow, steady overhaul of old ways of thinking and doing) are scary because if you want a shortcut to magical efficiency, you probably have no interest in the governance and power challenges that lurk therein"
I have a great example of this that I cant describe in detail here, but once worked with a non-profit organisation that thought they wanted a digital transformation, but when the CEO saw what the actual implications of that would be in terms of structural change, certain people losing power and influence, they decided instead to promptly fire the person who had commissioned us to do the review, even though this would clearly cost the organisation and its beneficiaries dearly...
Really nicely laid-out thoughts around this topic Alix! It is hard sometimes to put your finger on what exactly it is that is failing when you are in the midst of it. Seeing companies get Chief Digital Officers that come and upend entire processes, saying things like "some people won't like the changes" but there is very empathy in supporting those around the shift and how the shift brings up all of these issues with implicit rules which are either now hardcoded or which are not, and as a result, completely break the process. It is particularly hard for those who are on the loosing end of the power imbalances, who have been pointing these out for a while, and who now have to grapple with it as the person with power has no idea what to do with everything that is surfacing!
Re: automation - great example of this in Australia with robodebt - a heartbreaking story of the government imposing on the most vulnerable https://theconversation.com/robodebt-was-a-policy-fiasco-with-a-human-cost-we-have-yet-to-fully-appreciate-150169 and https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/nov/21/robodebt-related-trauma-the-victims-still-paying-for-australias-unlawful-welfare-crackdown
"This is also why automation and inference is so scary — the people, organisations, and states who want to leapfrog to automation and inference (rather than slow, steady overhaul of old ways of thinking and doing) are scary because if you want a shortcut to magical efficiency, you probably have no interest in the governance and power challenges that lurk therein"
I have a great example of this that I cant describe in detail here, but once worked with a non-profit organisation that thought they wanted a digital transformation, but when the CEO saw what the actual implications of that would be in terms of structural change, certain people losing power and influence, they decided instead to promptly fire the person who had commissioned us to do the review, even though this would clearly cost the organisation and its beneficiaries dearly...