Workplace Automation - Why Machines Aren't Always Better

Please remove unexpected item from bagging area

Photo by ThisisEngineering RAEng on Unsplash

You wake up to the sound of your alarm clock, giving it a half-hearted press to signal to it you intend to crawl out of bed at some point in the next ten (twenty) minutes. Enough time passes for you to realize that actually going to work is required if you want to keep earning a paycheck. You temporarily stow your phone and stumble to the kitchen, flicking on the espresso machine along the way. As you settle in at the table, you glimpse the clock and realize you're late. Wait... YOU'RE LATE! You scramble together a decent outfit and bolt out the door to your car, hitting the garage door opener on the fly. You're not completely out of the game yet. A quick check of your smartwatch says traffic is light. You can still hit a drive through for that breakfast you missed. A couple minutes later, you find yourself paying with a credit card for a grilled cheese sandwich which you can chow down on as you complete the final block and a half journey to the office.

Whether you realize it or not, machines are everywhere. These modern comforts have become so commonplace you can be forgiven for forgetting they are even there. A hundred years ago, that clock was a rooster, payment was not done by tapping plastic against a screen, and your smartwatch wasn't so smart. Seriously, replay that scenario but pretend electricity wasn't a thing.

Machines are designed to make stuff easy, and automation became a big deal as fancy things such as "Mass Production" entered the discussion. They do the job and they do it faster, usually making fewer mistakes along the way that you would typically associate with either repetition or challenge. Combine the "Set it and Forget it" nature of machines with those main benefits (fast and easy), and you know they were bound to make their way into pretty much every industry out there. Workplace automation has been driven by the improvement of these machines to the point that they can now outperform their human counterparts at many tasks. But does this mean machines are better? If you've read any of the other articles I've published up to this point, you'll know the answer isn't quite that straightforward (and if you read the title of this article, you probably already spoiled it for yourself).

So what makes a machine different from a tool? Why are machines and workplace automation a good thing? And why are people still a better option compared to machines in many cases despite workplace automation?

Photo by James Kovin on Unsplash

Putting some thought into it

Before we go too far, I want to narrow in on what we can consider a machine. Machines don't need to be complex Terminator style robots that have artificial intelligence to fit into our scope, but I'm more concerned with addressing the line between a machine and a tool. You can think of it as a spectrum, with AI driven machines on one end and the simple hammer on the other end. Now let's get closer to the middle of the spectrum and enter that grey area. Would you, dear reader, consider a power drill a tool or a machine? I mean, it runs on electricity and a motor, can be programmed to have different settings, and can have GPS installed in new models. And yet calling it a machine feels... wrong?

Alright, let's try approaching from the other side of the spectrum. Something like a washing machine is a good start as "machine" is built into the name. It's a perfect example of automation too; It has automated washing your laundry. Ok, what about that espresso machine from earlier? A little button pressing and you have yourself a device that has automated pouring you a cup of the best liquid on earth. And yet, like the power drill, it runs on electricity, has some motors built in, and can be equipped with GPS and smart technology. So what gives?

The key here is going to be in whether the driving force behind what's being done is coming from ones and zeros in a circuit board or from you and your big brain. Simply put, we can consider a tool to be anything that makes your job easier that you have to be the thought behind, while a machine will do the job AND the thinking for you (albeit with a couple prompts). The hammer won't just pick itself up and... hammer stuff. The drill, while electric and somewhat smart, cannot just start doing the job without human thought. But the other machines we mentioned? Press a button and a program runs that tells the machine what to do and how to think. A machine takes as much of the human experience out of the equation as possible, and those are what we are focusing on here.

Photo by Simone Impei on Unsplash

Designed with you in mind

Alright, so there it is then. Machines bad, workplace automation bad. Right?

ABSOLUTELY NOT

Workplace automation and machines are incredibly useful and important fixtures in everyday life. Just as tools were created to make tasks easier, machines designed with workers in mind to make their jobs easier are critically important in today's work environments. Automation of assembly lines to have machines handle heavy manufacturing tasks ensures precision that human strength would struggle to keep up with. The automation of the assembly line itself means less heavy lifting for those on the line! How about any of the algorithms or devices tied to workplace software that can run massive calculations automatically instead of requiring the work to be done by hand? As a tool, these machines are incredibly useful!

Again, workplace automation doesn't have to be complex. A cashier can use a pin pad to take payment and automate the purchasing process. A hairdresser can use a booking program to track their schedule. Almost any working professional can automate something from their phone. The potential is sky high as long as the machine is designed with the user in mind.

Increased safety? Check

Increased efficiency? Check

Increased accuracy? Check

This is all good stuff! This is all beneficial stuff! Workplace automation, when used properly, can be a positive addition to the job site. At least... when it works as intended and actually helps the workers.

Photo by Lenny Kuhne on Unsplash

Please wait for the next available representative

Machines that don't have state-of-the-art artificial intelligence are extremely good at doing. They are absolutely terrible at thinking. Yes, you can program a machine to do several different things, but it will never go outside of those boundaries. Workplace automation theoretically guarantees that any task that sits along the tracks that the machine works within will be done safer, faster, and better than if done by a person. Go even an inch outside of those boundaries and the illusion is broken.

Think of the last time you called your bank. I'm willing to bet you got yourself tied up with the mechanical voice of the phone tree asking you to "Listen to all the options" before listing off 7 options of which half could be removed because Google exists. After a couple button presses and feeling like you've gotten nowhere, the machine says it wants to ask what you want to discuss to "Serve you better" before listing off everything under the sun except for what you want. If you're like me, you've already just mashed "0" to speak to an operator by this point. Indeed, phone trees are an example of workplace automation. Do you think they're better than just... I don't know... speaking to a real person?

I could go through every industry and pick an example of workplace automation that makes about as much sense as that phone tree. On paper, the phone tree is great! You have automated a solution for people calling in with questions! But the issue is that the questions people have need to be within the boundaries of the machine running the phone tree or everything falls apart. You eventually need the human element to solve the problem and all the machine has done is drag the process out and make things more frustrating. I can't help but think of this every time I go to a grocery store and use the self-checkout only to scan some fruit and have the machine practically explode with confusion and flash a red light to signal a person to come fix everything. I could have been faster if I just went through a till with a person.

Photo by Tbel Abuseridze on Unsplash

The human cost

When workplace automation and the machines involved in the automation fail, it results in a bad end user experience. Period. A machine could do a job 99% flawlessly but that last 1% will stick out and prompt a "Why can't they just get a person to do it" type of response. As a business, if you want to build a good customer experience, you need to consider the response of the customer when workplace automation fails. It's easy to see this happen in retail and service industries, but what about medical fields? What happens when the MRI machine doesn't function properly? How about the engineer who's modeling software updates and converts everything to different units? A building falling down is a pretty bad user experience.

I also want to mention the effect on the machine operators and the employees who monitor these machines. The machine does the task that requires a set of skills to complete, and training employees to press buttons to operate the machine actively detracts from the employee's skill set. Instead of learning applicable knowledge on the job, training now amounts to which buttons to press to start or stop the machine, what to do to clear an error, and the big red one shuts it down if it catches fire or rips a hole in the ceiling. As expectations for applicants to new jobs grows increasingly strict, degrading the skill set of the workers by way of workplace automation only does harm in the long run.

Photo by Harpal Singh on Unsplash

The real human cost

I have yet to touch on it, but what about the real human cost of workplace automation? I'm talking about the complete replacement of people with their machine counterparts. Yes, the person running six automated stations at a factory is not getting as much skilled experience as they otherwise would have, but they are at least getting a paycheck. How many people are failing to enter the job market or are being forced out in the name of workplace automation? At the end of the day, people are best serviced by people, but that is steadily becoming less common and it's a trend that will eventually need to be addressed.

I will admit that there are jobs that are uniquely protected against such automation. Jobs which require a distinctly human touch such as psychology, entertainment, and law enforcement have proven that machines are not yet up to the task of replacing people. However, it is becoming increasingly common for workers in skilled professions such as medical, engineering, and banking fields to see their duties sourced to a computer and some moving parts. It takes jobs away from people, which does nothing but increase competition for the jobs that remain and puts pressure on those who find themselves pushed out of the market to find other ways to make ends meet. As machines get better and as workplace automation becomes more prevalent, this list of protected jobs will only grow smaller.

Photo by Romain V on Unsplash

Feed the machine

Workplace automation and the machines that drive them are powerful tools if they are used to help the workers that use them. At the end of the day, if we are going to continue to expect new human employees to occupy the workplace, we need to ensure that we are preparing them for the workplace and offering them a chance to succeed. Industries are largely machines in and of themselves, and workers are the electricity that keeps the machine running.

If you're considering replacing workers with machines, you've probably crunched some numbers along the way and found you could save some amount of money. That being said, consider the following:

Am I willing to put customer satisfaction at risk?

Am I willing to retrain my employees to work the machines?

Is the cost to upkeep the machine worth it in the long run?

Am I willing to accept that my employee will receive less specialized or applicable training?

Am I willing to lay off staff to accommodate the machines and have a reputation of having done that?

Machines aren't always better, and at the end of the day if you need a worker to be able to think on the fly and have offer a person-first experience, a human will still beat a machine. Consider your workers when you implement workplace automation and ask if machines are truly a good fit for the task. Remember, it is people who are also driving your business on a sales end as well, and people will respond to your choices. Give yourself the best chance to have that response be a positive one.

~IR

Have you experienced workplace automation at your job? Are you at risk of losing out on skills or your job as a result of machines? Or maybe you just have a comment to add? Check out the Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or LinkedIn page and let everyone know. Don't forget to follow or like the page for updates! And share this article if you feel others should give it a read!

Return to Home

Return to Technology