The Fragility of Skills
The Digital Doppelgänger
As background and context, see my post from Sunday at Outside the Walls
Something about the current workplace reminds me of the term “fog of war,” which describes the fact that in the middle of the action, neither those on the ground nor those directing them have any real idea of what is going on. They commit to a plan that disintegrates upon use and can only judge success or failure afterwards, reflecting on the casualties left on the field.
There is an interesting, slightly disturbing piece in this week’s Economist (paywall) that considers the rising impact of “digital twins”:
A digital twin is a virtual representation of something. It could be an object, like a car or an aircraft. Or, as we consider in the next two stories, it could be more complex systems, such as industrial processes or bodily organs. Even in the case of a humble car part, it encompasses more than physical attributes, from details about how the object was built and how it ages to how it breaks and the way it can be recycled.
Given our appetite for short-term margin gains, it is not a giant leap to imagine the same approach being adopted in the field of skilled jobs. The attractions are evident for those who can leverage it quickly, even as the unintended consequences are more likely to be picked up by those who buy the organisations using it or, increasingly, I suspect, the taxpayer. Klarna is apparently heading for a listing shortly.
The question it raises is how, as Artisans, we understand, nurture, and develop those parts of ourselves that our digital twin cannot capture. Everything we do that is recorded, probably including the make of the mouse jiggler we use to take a break, can be replicated. Our skills, and even our voices, can be digitised. It is not a conspiracy, merely the relentless logic of our capabilities with technology married to business models that prioritise returns.
Inevitably, though, the logic is so compelling to the number crunchers that they wilfully ignore the weakness it builds into the organisation's reality. To go back to the “fog of war” metaphor:
The concept of "the strategic corporal" was first introduced by General Charles C. Krulak, then Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps, in a 1999 article titled "The Strategic Corporal: Leadership in the Three Block War" published in Marines Magazine. Krulak used the term to emphasize how the increasing complexity of modern warfare, combined with pervasive media coverage, means that even low-level tactical decisions made by junior leaders like corporals can have significant strategic consequences.
Source: compiled by Perplexity.ai on my research.
In many ways, Artisans are the organizational equivalent of strategic corporals. They make decisions based on their unique circumstances, and the quality of those decisions will result from their training, character, commitment, and their leaders' confidence in them. The circumstances will never be precisely repeated, a nuisance for AI.
The skilled artisan makes decisions based on multiple factors, some of which are unconscious, such as the feel of the wood, the available ingredients, or the flow of the code. Those factors are often invisible, not only to the artisan but to those who employ them. It means that skills and insights that may prove vital at critical moments are not considered when efficiencies are sought and resources “rationalised.” We are already seeing examples arising from essentially human judgment in areas that AI will not yet touch, but which we are none the less enthusiastically embracing.
I believe that there are important lessons for us here.
Firstly, that organisation is less dependent on senior leadership, which is largely interchangeable, and more on essential but often invisible decisions made in the body of the organisation in their equivalent of the “fog of war”.
Secondly, as artisans, we do not recognise what we do which is taken for granted and escapes the formulaic performance appraisal process. Artisans are as vital as they are overlooked.
Thirdly, the gap left in capability and insight resulting from hasty, greedy rationalisation will come back to haunt those doing it and represent opportunities not for “big five” consultancies but those used to operating in the “fog of war”.
Fourth. That none of this logic will prevent the AI rationalisation frenzy.
The challenge for us, then, is to recognise the inevitability of the disruption we will face in our careers and the necessity of preparing for it. Accepting technology might erode our technical skills base, but it is blind to the critical qualities of character and imagination we bring to it. We are all,in our way, the equivalent of the “O” ring in the Challenger disaster.
We inevitably overlook our own unique qualities - we have grown up with them, and they are invisible to us. They are, however, clear to others, not in the wilfully blind arena of those measuring our performance but to those operating in other arenas with whom we can share our insights and ideas.
We need to do it before we need it, bringing together those who have experienced the disruption we all face, those in the middle of it, and those who yet to enter it.
I am, with others, starting to understand how we might map this “Terra Incognita”, this “Fog of War” at Outside the Walls, by bringing those affected together in conversation. If you’re interested, it would be good to hear your voice.
In the interests of all of us for whom work is more than money.