Skip to main content

is your "score", you?


Avid Andy begins to wonder if he may be schizophrenic.  Or could it be a sign of true genius when he can see a problem from all sides? Andy was reflecting on a service meeting that happened last week.  Conversation was around our ability to objectively measure things and make better decisions. At the center of almost any measurement environment are the fundamentals of math. To determine priority or influence, it seems logical when dealing with inanimate objects like sensors, assets, and sites in a portfolio to move towards "point-based systems". The real dilemma for Andy seemed to comes when we begin scoring humans and letting pre-determined algorithms establish an individuals path.



Our service meeting quickly changed from tactical to philosophical discussions and one of the technicians, Pragmatic Paul, made mention of a black mirror program (Netflix) named "Nosedive".   In this futuristic episode, an individuals score dictates their behavior and those surrounding them, are we paving this road?   It seemed reasonable to create points of measurement that could be used to gauge a workers fit for a job, skills, proximity, cost, billable rate, etc.  What happens if those scores are used for tangential purposes. How about your value to the organization is based off of these performance scores?  Possibly the scores of people that you run with most frequently have an impact?  What about scores regarding your personality type or relationship you may have with another employee or even a customer?  Could the score be impacted by your age, your ethnicity, your ability to deliver a full day's work? 



As we endeavor down the path of providing the best person for any service situation, we need to keep a mindful eye to the future.  Intelligence today, without mention of governance, could result in a bumpy future filled with the best intentions.



-----

Next post:  from the field to the office
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Speaking AI (artifical intelligence)

You're talking but I can't hear you.   Everyone can certainly understand this condition; the "Peanuts" parents who sounded exactly like your own, your significant other while you watch your favorite game on TV, or most importantly a work colleague or partner which you are attempting to communicate a thought or vision.   All of these, and many other examples, have plagued our organizations long past the childhood game of telephone (passing your words to another, and on to another, etc.).   So what?   What has changed?   Besides the velocity of products hitting the market, the requirements that we have for our business now needs to be interpreted by data scientists, yet another abstraction layer from the field conditions.   Think about this example; TODAY :   we often think in binary terms, if "x" happens do "y" …   take a sales person seeking potential leads by searching a system for the last time we made contact TOMMOR...
Post a Comment
Read more

months to aquire, moments to lose

It is just hard to imagine that one of the most common reasons maintenance contracts are lost is because people don't show up and don't pay attention to the details.   In many cases maintenance is an investment to keep the life of your asset running for a protracted period of time. However the length on many maintenance contracts is not even close to the life expectancy of that equipment, so if you don't really have any idea what maintenance is being performed then how do you really know if it's being done to your specification? Thus, it really boils down to business elements, assuming that you are actually performing the work, our focus needs to be on how you are differentiated. Let's take a look at a couple of the most common business-related reasons why people lose maintenance contracts. Not showing up ; managing contracts can be complicated between the sites, number of assets, and the frequencies at which items need to be maintained, can a...
Post a Comment
Read more

is seeing comprehending?

Oh yeah, visual inspections are why God gave us eyes.   There is not a single machine learning, IoT, computerized environment that can match the skills a human's brain can assess and deliver based on visual feedback. The trick is making sure that the person connected to those eyeballs actually knows what they are looking for!   Face it, aren't the best workers those that can recognize an issue long before it becomes a problem? So instead, is the challenge really not that they can visually see, but instead that they can comprehend and correlate potential challenges? While we have many different definitions for "wisdom" in context of this topic, I think about it as those individuals which have had the most experience, both good and bad. Coincidentally I am a firm believer that the best service people are those that make the most frequent mistakes. When I was in the field I had lots of experience screwing things up. The difference is that I would always check and tri...
Post a Comment
Read more