Audit paradox: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|tech|}} | {{a|tech|}}{{Buchstein}}’s audit [[:Category:Paradox|paradox]] observes that, should you use workflow tools, [[legaltech]] and automation to carry out rudimentary tasks they will, by their nature, force you into sub-optimal behaviour patterns. In other words a tool that is meant to ''save'' work and ''reduce'' anxiety actually creates ''more'' of it. | ||
The [[audit paradox]] is at the confluence of three streams of modern institutional thinking: | The [[audit paradox]] is at the confluence of three streams of modern institutional thinking: | ||
Revision as of 14:43, 5 February 2022
|
The JC pontificates about technology
An occasional series.
|
Büchstein’s audit paradox observes that, should you use workflow tools, legaltech and automation to carry out rudimentary tasks they will, by their nature, force you into sub-optimal behaviour patterns. In other words a tool that is meant to save work and reduce anxiety actually creates more of it.
The audit paradox is at the confluence of three streams of modern institutional thinking:
- The buttocractic oath: One’s first priority is to one’s own posterior. Primum nil errare: First, do no harm to your own career.
- Casanova’s advice: If in doubt, stick it in: it won’t do any harm to ask for contractual protections we don’t in point of fact, really need.
- The world consists of what can be measured: The ultra-reductionist view that as long as you can measure something you can control it.