You can lead a horse to water: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{a|work|}}It is one thing designing an order-of-magnitude-better, revolutionary app; quite another to get it through the Hunger Games experience that is procurement and infor...") Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|work|}}It is one thing designing an order-of-magnitude-better, revolutionary app; quite another to get it through the Hunger Games experience that is procurement and information security clearance | {{a|work|}}It is one thing designing an order-of-magnitude-better, revolutionary app; quite another to get it through the ''Hunger Games'' experience that is [[procurement]] and [[information security]] clearance — budget 18months in spent time and five to ten years off your life — but all that pales into infinitesimal irrelevance compared with the task, once installed on the desktops, of getting any lawyers to ''use'' it. | ||
This presents a further hurdle to tech implementation, seldom spoken of but every bit as gruesome. For if take-up is not immediate and universal, in an obscenely short period of time, some officious twerp from the [[Chief operating office|operating office]] will be along with a clipboard asking ''why'' no-one is using it, whether it is really value for money, and threatening to off-board it before quarter end. This is the dilemma: ''before'' you buy it, [[legaltech]] is the promise of [[innovation]], [[performative]] [[Thought leader|thought-leadership]] and [[digital prophet|digital prophecy]]. ''After'' you’ve bought it, [[legaltech]] is an ''operating cost''. An operating office is attracted like a moth to both, so they turn out to be symbiotic. Our metaphor of the [[bucket painters]] refers. | |||
Unless it is a management-sanctioned monitoring or measuring tool, like time recording of document management, in which case you can guarantee noone will use it, but the [[middle management ouija board]] will bloody-mindedly persist with it in the face of utter failure — that is, if it really is user productivity booster —a formatting fixer, or a deltaview application, management will quickly implement a use monitoring process with the express goal of concluding noone is using the software, so it can be junked in a cost saving drive. | Unless it is a management-sanctioned monitoring or measuring tool, like time recording of document management, in which case you can guarantee noone will use it, but the [[middle management ouija board]] will bloody-mindedly persist with it in the face of utter failure — that is, if it really is user productivity booster —a formatting fixer, or a deltaview application, management will quickly implement a use monitoring process with the express goal of concluding noone is using the software, so it can be junked in a cost saving drive. | ||
Revision as of 14:51, 16 October 2021
|
Office anthropology™
|
It is one thing designing an order-of-magnitude-better, revolutionary app; quite another to get it through the Hunger Games experience that is procurement and information security clearance — budget 18months in spent time and five to ten years off your life — but all that pales into infinitesimal irrelevance compared with the task, once installed on the desktops, of getting any lawyers to use it.
This presents a further hurdle to tech implementation, seldom spoken of but every bit as gruesome. For if take-up is not immediate and universal, in an obscenely short period of time, some officious twerp from the operating office will be along with a clipboard asking why no-one is using it, whether it is really value for money, and threatening to off-board it before quarter end. This is the dilemma: before you buy it, legaltech is the promise of innovation, performative thought-leadership and digital prophecy. After you’ve bought it, legaltech is an operating cost. An operating office is attracted like a moth to both, so they turn out to be symbiotic. Our metaphor of the bucket painters refers.
Unless it is a management-sanctioned monitoring or measuring tool, like time recording of document management, in which case you can guarantee noone will use it, but the middle management ouija board will bloody-mindedly persist with it in the face of utter failure — that is, if it really is user productivity booster —a formatting fixer, or a deltaview application, management will quickly implement a use monitoring process with the express goal of concluding noone is using the software, so it can be junked in a cost saving drive.