This is an auto-generated email
|
Office anthropology™
|
Is there anything grimmer, in a high-modern working life strewn with grimnities, than an autogenerated email? It is so disempowering, so passive-aggressive, so ignorant of every basic principle of a life well-lived, full of rich professional experience — a life to which our dark overlords pledge public, undying commitment — that you would think no thoughtful modern business administrator would dream of using it.
But modern business administrators are thoughtful in the way modern yachts are dairy-free.
If we take it as a given that the optimal outcome to a newly-implemented process is 100% compliance without hesitation, repetition or deviation, let alone (God forbid!) complaint, then it is no more than sensible product design to ensure your loud-hailer can go everywhere yet come from nowhere and, once supplicants have clocked its clangorous tone — in the comprehensively auditable ecosystem of a Microsoft Exchange server, they can hardly miss it, even if they do actually, you know, miss it — they have no choice but to bend their weary footsteps to its urgings, however preposterous the outcome of that action might be.
But years of miserable life-experience tells us not take that as a given.
Even well-designed processes rust over time — and those that envision the meatware playing “Simon Says” with an automated compliance system are not well-designed, let us be clear — so those responsible for them still need the occasional nudge to give the whole thing a going over with a wire brush and Dettol just to make sure it remains fit for purpose. This nudge usually comes from those obliged to follow the process complaining about it.
In this way are interests, theoretically, aligned: the meatware resents its time being wasted; middle managers don’t enjoy being whined at, so the feedback loop balances itself into a kind of vaguely tiresome equilibrium. Every now and then, before things get properly absurd, middle management will overhaul the process to make it less of a pain — for everyone.
The unmonitored, auto-generated email breaks that feedback loop.
Now the user doesn’t know who sent the email, who owns the system, or whom to whine at. She may try to work it out, by searching fruitlessly on the intranet —It is a truth universally acknowledged that no intranet contains any information that is both up-to-date and useful — but her wave of ire will eventually crest and she will go back to her other tediae, the matter unresolved.
The responsible middle manager — if there is one, and we cannot now even be certain of that: for all we know, the system may have become self-aware, generating its own Kafkaesque processes — remains blissfully ignorant of the waste and exasperation. Indeed, unshackled from the responsibility of keeping the process serviceably un-stupid, she is free to create more wasteful processes, watched over by more unmonitored accounts, and for each one of them she can report a full slate of green indicators on her RAG dashboard at the monthly opco stakeholder check-in. Compliance is inferred and when, as surely it will, something catastrophically breaks, internal audit must look ex machina for the fault in our stars and will find it, instead, in the mortal human hearts of the subject matter expert. Our care-free middle manager may even get a promotion.
This really does happen. The aftermath of Archegos within the brokers was of exactly this character.
See also
- The auto-generated email that does not just warn you about something, or chide you for something, but actively gives you work to do. You’ve been assigned a task!
- Sidney Dekker’s The Field Guide to Human Error Investigations