Thread by @iwelsh

I'll tell you a secret as someone who worked on paper and computers, being there for the transition: in most cases computers make business processes slower. A lot slower. Old mainframe processes were also faster than micro processes.

In auditing I found the difference about 4X.

https://twitter.com/balajis/status/1329315470999126016

A search function is only good if you know what you're looking for, exactly, for example. It was far faster to scan old paper files in audits.

Computers were generally used for control, to make workers take all sorts of steps. The slow downs were massive.

emails allowed for far more interruptions of work, you had to check them and respond. Before that it was just phones (which also sucked, especially VM, but the volume was much less.)

email, in particular, made it to easy to bother people with check ups. Previous to that the work got done when it got done, which, ironically, meant it got done faster, a lot faster.

Also email chains and email ass-covering with cc:s eat time.

In the old megacorp every time they did large "upgrades" to the computer programs we worked with, they made the workflow less efficient. I know this, because I measured it repeatedly since management wouldn't admit it if I didn't hammer them with the numbers.

computers, as administrative tools, are mostly about control, and rarely optimized for efficient work flow. Further, analog is just superior for a lot of things. For certain types of audits, give me a desk and paper files or printouts & it will go MUCH faster.

this isn't to deny all usability to computers. They are useful, and often they do allow some things to be done faster. But, as noted, that isn't what is optimized for. Also the "ease" of putting new #s into a spreadsheet/database encourages bullshit that paper files discouraged.

computers were also often used to justify moving workers away from each other, which also destroyed productivity. If I'm part of a work flow, having the person where I can easily walk over makes a huge difference in efficiency + for fixing problems.

the analog world had its issues, but it was not as shitty as people make out. And, honestly, the telecom revolution of everyone carrying a comms device sucks ass. Even in the early 90s, when work was over you were out communication w/bosses. That was GOOD.

I should note that I know the difference in auditing files because I had to an series of audits where some files had been scanned, and some were still on paper. The paper files were SO much faster there was no comparison. It was amazing.

if ya think this is all BS, remember, the improvements don't show up in productivity statistics. The onus isn't on me to make the argument, it is on those who think otherwise.

review.chicagobooth.edu/economics/2018…