Key to mass computerization
My recent trysts with certain government bodies and their working culture helped me understand why computerization isn’t such a rosy path to implementation.
My conclusion: a personal computer is a multitasking1 monster of a machine. It’s far too generic for a specific task. So much that it hurts. (And this is, by far, the simplest reason why a cellphone is enormously popular, has virtually no learning curve, my semi-literate milkman can use it.) Stretch this logic of partial literacy to office clerks (and green eyed bogeymen, who extend their hands under the table for a few unlawful bucks more in Government offices), and you’ll begin to understand their inertia, indifference, and in some cases, open hatred towards computerization. In a country where you are forced to pay bribe at every table your papers pass over, this is hardly surprising.
Usability of machines — Let’s get back to that cellphone. What makes it tick when compared with a personal computer? Fewer options, simple and linear tasks, single point entry and exit. Compare a cellphone’s SMS feature with that of a PC. You need to boot the machine. Load up a software. Need access to the internet (either via telephone or via the network). Write the story, connect to the net and then press send. Does it seem like an eternity?
Age also plays an important role in increasing the learning curve.
Office clerks, who handle day-to-day job of the annoyingly routine tasks, are no different from those swiping your groceries at the checkouts in, say, Food World. If your grocery clerk’s machine cannot print a bill, say due to a malfunction in his teller unit, he’ll hold up the entire queue. This is exactly what happens, so often, in Government offices that are computerized.
A municipal office clerk cannot print a birth certificate in English because he has a regional language software and typography set in. Or he has not learnt the method of typing a sequence of English keys to get the right words in the regional language on screen and in print.
I have actually witnessed this happening, in frustration, thought and, at times begged him to let go of the PC and write by hand, which he promptly refused. Data entry can be so hard for a common man. His data was just five fields: Full Name, Date of birth, Place of birth, Mother’s name and Father’s name. It took him about an hour to get a couple of prinouts after pointing out and correcting several mistakes (in the Indian regional language used).
You have to really experience it to realize how technology can rub us the wrong way, so bad that it begins to burn, if implemented improperly.
From what I gather, it is the linearity of the task that makes the person, sitting on the other side of the counter or desk, efficient.
A railway booking clerk knows how his booking system works. A grocery clerk knows where to type the serial number of a product when the bar scanner cannot detect it. In both these examples, systems implemented are robust, almost foolproof and less prone to errors.
People interested in bringing in computerization in Government offices should note this. Like for example, a births and deaths clerk in the municipal office should have a simple machine (not a generic PC) that can query records by keywords, enter information easily (enter data only once for any number of language translations).
These specific machines boot like they’re always on (as waking from a sleep), have far fewer options (enter data, query, print, copy), and a near zero learning curve. The closest that fits this kind is the one that IBM provides to offices, businesses, grocery stores, et al.
- Multitasking here is not meant in a strict parallel processing of tasks per se. [←]
I’d suggest the opposite. Letting them know about Solitaire and Tetris and all such technological timepass. Maybe clue them in on where to find Desi porn. Voila!!… the computer is the government clerk’s new best friend. And the more time wasted typing and printing a form, is more time taken away from leering at bollywood boobies. Maybe they need more incentives not less.
Oct 10, 06 at 14:12