While there is some good in making machines more like humans, why do we try to make humans more like machines?
I was at the post office recently to mail a package. When I reached the counter the clerk started to rattle through a list of options, with prices, most of which were not relevant to me. We've all experienced this from a machine, as in a list of menu options or a phone system IVR (interactive voice response) that must be listened to before you can actually go do the thing you already know you want to do. But since I was dealing with a human, and not a machine, I tried to skip ahead and go right to what I wanted.
But I couldn't. The post office, or maybe just this branch, or this one clerk, couldn't do that. She had to read all my options to me. Even more frustrating, when I explained that I knew exactly how I wanted to mail the package, she told me that since I had interrupted her she now had to start all over.
This was a process gone wrong. The creation of a machine-like human. She eventually got my conformation through exasperation and I waited through (and ignored) the whole list a second time. Then I heard a total price which was much higher than I expected. I dared to repeat what the way I wanted to mail the package and found that by ignoring the list and not declining an option for insurance I had accepted it.
She repriced it. Gave me a receipt. Told me to have a nice day.
And I left (slightly depressed) wondering how this was possible.
You'd think that the post office, of all places, has no where to go but up in their efficiency. You'd think that the post office would want to improve customer service as much as the next organization. You'd think that the post office would take heart from its history, back when it really was an amazing institution -- I mean, it wasn't that long ago when delivering packages accurately and in a timely fashion to addresses hundreds or thousands of miles away was truly magic.
But instead I was told to have a nice day.
Don't put your people in a position where they have to be machine-like humans. Where you do use processes, give them processes with escape hatches so they can bring the benefits of being human to their work.
Showing posts with label conversation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label conversation. Show all posts
Dear Paul Graham, This is From My 2nd Daily Hike
To get to my office, I have a round trip two-hour commute on the NYC subway each day (come see me on the F train). That means I'm free from the net during that time. It's like taking a hike in the connection wilderness. And I love it.
Could one of New York City's advantages be the un-networked subway? Those regular gaps when we have freedom from emails, status updates, the little unimportant interruptions that dot our days. But that's going to end when the subway gets WiFi.
Isn't there a safety advantage to wiring the subway? OK, sure. But I don't think any advantage like that is even close to the cost of doing it, both in economic and social terms. Soon enough there will be tweets on how bad the car smells and where the HPOA are (I swear I didn't know that term before I saw this.
Will subway service improve as a result? The MTA has what is best described as an "attitude problem" when it comes to making improvements. Passengers with communication technology have an opportunity to help improve the subway, or at least join chats and give feedback while riding. Some of these activities could pressure the MTA to make improvements, though probably more so subway lines that have more than average numbers of smartphone users. And if people sit in cafes all day for free WiFi, what will they do in subway cars?
Until then, I usually read on the subway. I read books made of paper, ink and glue. I've been known to write there as well. On paper with a pen. Those are both activities I don't do much anymore above ground. But for clarity, a subway ride can be worth a day of connectivity.
[About the title, there's a reference there to this Paul Graham essay:
The Acceleration of Addictiveness.
Could one of New York City's advantages be the un-networked subway? Those regular gaps when we have freedom from emails, status updates, the little unimportant interruptions that dot our days. But that's going to end when the subway gets WiFi.
Isn't there a safety advantage to wiring the subway? OK, sure. But I don't think any advantage like that is even close to the cost of doing it, both in economic and social terms. Soon enough there will be tweets on how bad the car smells and where the HPOA are (I swear I didn't know that term before I saw this.
Will subway service improve as a result? The MTA has what is best described as an "attitude problem" when it comes to making improvements. Passengers with communication technology have an opportunity to help improve the subway, or at least join chats and give feedback while riding. Some of these activities could pressure the MTA to make improvements, though probably more so subway lines that have more than average numbers of smartphone users. And if people sit in cafes all day for free WiFi, what will they do in subway cars?
Until then, I usually read on the subway. I read books made of paper, ink and glue. I've been known to write there as well. On paper with a pen. Those are both activities I don't do much anymore above ground. But for clarity, a subway ride can be worth a day of connectivity.
[About the title, there's a reference there to this Paul Graham essay:
The Acceleration of Addictiveness.
Startups and Meeting People
With the Startup - Rockband comparison nicely described, here's a reason that gets too little notice in benefits of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship is an excuse to talk to someone. I remember hearing Jeff Pulver remark that much social networking activity comes from loneliness. While entrepreneurship is not at all the same as social networking, one of the great things about it is the ability to meet new people and form a team. Or at least exchange ideas.
Now, this alone isn't enough of a reason to start a company, but it is overlooked. As I look back over this year, a lot of the people I know now I hadn't met before embarking on Chatfe -- and I never would have met them had I stayed in a corporate role. When I have time I'll write about some of them here.
Now, this alone isn't enough of a reason to start a company, but it is overlooked. As I look back over this year, a lot of the people I know now I hadn't met before embarking on Chatfe -- and I never would have met them had I stayed in a corporate role. When I have time I'll write about some of them here.
Financial Models, Clams and Four Years without Pulpo Gallego
Fortune-telling Pulpo Paul did what few (if any) others did, eight 100% accurate World Cup predictions, which if we simply assume that the octopus chose at random, leads to an expected 1/256 chance of getting them all correct.
I'm glad Pulpo Paul made it straight through with perfect accuracy, and not just because of Spain's win. I'm glad because if he made a mistake, everyone would've said "hey, it's just an octopus, what did you expect?" And there would've been commentary from Nassim Nicholas Taleb on fund manager accuracy, the file drawer problem and comparisons to financial modeling. And all justified. That's what made Pulpo Paul's picks so great. He (and his owner) put it all on the line in each game. No excuses. No complex models. Just pick a clam out of a box with a flag on it.
The other thing about the choices were the audience knew their accuracy just a day or two afterward. No waiting for months or years as in the case of business modeling.
And hey, sometimes that's the way it is with decisions startups make, too. Sometimes why something worked or didn't work might as well be explained as a clam in a box. It doesn't mean you don't act; it doesn't mean you don't try to get an edge or learn. But sometimes it just happens. Being lucky is ok with me. And to remind myself, no pulpo gallego until the 2014 World Cup.
But some advice to Pulpo Paul's owner: Never let him predict anything ever again. Not even a coin toss.
I'm glad Pulpo Paul made it straight through with perfect accuracy, and not just because of Spain's win. I'm glad because if he made a mistake, everyone would've said "hey, it's just an octopus, what did you expect?" And there would've been commentary from Nassim Nicholas Taleb on fund manager accuracy, the file drawer problem and comparisons to financial modeling. And all justified. That's what made Pulpo Paul's picks so great. He (and his owner) put it all on the line in each game. No excuses. No complex models. Just pick a clam out of a box with a flag on it.
The other thing about the choices were the audience knew their accuracy just a day or two afterward. No waiting for months or years as in the case of business modeling.
And hey, sometimes that's the way it is with decisions startups make, too. Sometimes why something worked or didn't work might as well be explained as a clam in a box. It doesn't mean you don't act; it doesn't mean you don't try to get an edge or learn. But sometimes it just happens. Being lucky is ok with me. And to remind myself, no pulpo gallego until the 2014 World Cup.
But some advice to Pulpo Paul's owner: Never let him predict anything ever again. Not even a coin toss.
Louise Bourgeois's Last Salon
Louise Bourgeois passed away today. If you don't know about her, you can read up here.
But there's one personal reason why I remember her.
For decades, she ran a weekly salon out of her home in Chelsea. As long as you had something to show, you could call ahead, make an appointment, and be welcomed in around 3pm on Sunday for a very civilized, yet active, and sometimes critical salon.
I'll spare you a description of the work I brought and what we said. But the important thing was, here were people from all different places and interests, coming together to discuss their work. And you had to discuss. You couldn't just sit back sipping cognac and eating chocolates from the table. You had to be an active participant.
This was almost two years ago. Last year, one of the other attending artists told me that we were at the last salon ever held.
Nice to know you, Louise. Your and your salon influenced the way I communicate.
But there's one personal reason why I remember her.
For decades, she ran a weekly salon out of her home in Chelsea. As long as you had something to show, you could call ahead, make an appointment, and be welcomed in around 3pm on Sunday for a very civilized, yet active, and sometimes critical salon.
I'll spare you a description of the work I brought and what we said. But the important thing was, here were people from all different places and interests, coming together to discuss their work. And you had to discuss. You couldn't just sit back sipping cognac and eating chocolates from the table. You had to be an active participant.
This was almost two years ago. Last year, one of the other attending artists told me that we were at the last salon ever held.
Nice to know you, Louise. Your and your salon influenced the way I communicate.
Unintended Conversational Consequences of NYC's Cigarette Tax
Though I don't smoke, I spend enough time looking and listening to notice that when NYC put out a big tax on cigarettes, the city extinguished a conversational spark.
It used to be that the smokers' question: "bum a smoke?" would lead to a talk -- as well as a cigarette. And I'm sure I've heard that phrase used purely as an excuse to talk to someone else. Ever since a pack of Marlboroughs went up to about $7 in NYC, people have taken a transactional approach. With fifty cents in hand, hard-core nicotine addicts try to buy a cigarette from smokers.
Those former talks are now lost, since the buyer/seller are now just part of a transaction. So, their lungs may be cleaner, but they've lost a connection to random strangers that used to exist. We hope that Chatfe makes up for that loss. [Note: I first wrote about this years ago, but thought it was worth reposting here. Chatfe is an antidote to this behavior.]
It used to be that the smokers' question: "bum a smoke?" would lead to a talk -- as well as a cigarette. And I'm sure I've heard that phrase used purely as an excuse to talk to someone else. Ever since a pack of Marlboroughs went up to about $7 in NYC, people have taken a transactional approach. With fifty cents in hand, hard-core nicotine addicts try to buy a cigarette from smokers.
Those former talks are now lost, since the buyer/seller are now just part of a transaction. So, their lungs may be cleaner, but they've lost a connection to random strangers that used to exist. We hope that Chatfe makes up for that loss. [Note: I first wrote about this years ago, but thought it was worth reposting here. Chatfe is an antidote to this behavior.]
Babelfish Blues
In "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" Douglas Adams tells us about the Babelfish, a small fish you put in your ear, which lives on sound waves and excretes brain waves, neatly translating any language (if you don't mind a fish in your ear). I can't describe how much I wanted a Babelfish while I was growing up. But, as it turned out, I had to content myself with the study of Spanish and Chinese.
But really, I was wrong. A Babelfish is only part of the solution to communicating with different people (or aliens). Today, I'd rather be able to converse eloquently and with meaning in one or two languages, rather than understand every language. There should be a counterpart to the Babelfish -- some kind of barnacle -- that attaches itself to a tooth and then makes what you say intriguing yet comforting to anyone you speak to. Until we discover it or a new author invents it, I'll have to content myself with talking the best I can. You can practice on Chatfe. Send us a message to join the private beta.
But really, I was wrong. A Babelfish is only part of the solution to communicating with different people (or aliens). Today, I'd rather be able to converse eloquently and with meaning in one or two languages, rather than understand every language. There should be a counterpart to the Babelfish -- some kind of barnacle -- that attaches itself to a tooth and then makes what you say intriguing yet comforting to anyone you speak to. Until we discover it or a new author invents it, I'll have to content myself with talking the best I can. You can practice on Chatfe. Send us a message to join the private beta.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
