Kristina Knaving’s Post

There is this joke in software development: the first 90% of the work takes 90% of the time, and the last 10% takes another 90%. We humans tend to think linearly about processes (just look at how we assume tech trends will just keep on going), but the joke does reveal a basic truth about complex systems. Sweden's police force, despite doubling its budget and staff, finds itself paralysed by an increasing number of internal controls. The Swedish police now have at least 589 separate regulatory documents, many contradicting each other. As one officer describes it, the force has become "an elephant that only eats Excel sheets." I see this transformation of sensible oversight into bureaucratic quicksand everywhere, and it is not surprising that The Swedish Work Environment Authority has recently started to look into digital work environment and found it severely lacking. Getting from 90% to 100% compliance costs more than getting from zero to 90%. Administrators and policymakers, perhaps dazzled by visions of perfect control and often with a lack of understanding of how the work is actually done, keep building centralised systems that ignore this basic fact. The Police chief's admission that she doesn't even know the number of her own regulatory documents is a pretty good implication of how deep the dysfunction is — a system so complex it defies its own accounting.. In accordance with Lessig's rule "Code is Law", digitalised documents usually demand perfection, leaving individuals to translate a messy reality to perfect checkboxes that have been designed by someone who does not pay the cost of filling them in. Furthermore, when you demand that users fill in a form that where many cannot adequately describe the reality they see, or where the question is uncertain, you will also fail to get working decision support - you don't need a lot of bad data to contaminate the entire data set. Humans can ask questions and handle complex answers, forms usually can not. Modern bureaucracies, quite intoxicated by dreams of perfect oversight, have engineered their own paralysis. Their digital systems demand perfect data where human judgement was once enough (a parallel here is how we no longer trust experts) Smart governance means knowing when good enough is, well, good enough. The emergency measures now allowing Swedish police chiefs to ignore governance documents highlight the absurdity of all of this. In an age of constrained resources, we can no longer afford to let perfect be the enemy of good, especially if we want to meet recent challenges and disruptions. The alternative is clear: doubled resources yielding diminished results, as public servants drown in paperwork instead of serving the public. The Police force may be the ones called out, but really, this is everywhere.

Ledare: Hur kunde polisens inre monster få växa sig så stort?

Ledare: Hur kunde polisens inre monster få växa sig så stort?

dn.se

Allen Smith 🇺🇸🇸🇪

Building the future of Generative UX.

2w

This, Millennium, etc. make me wonder who are ultimately running these "digitalisation" projects. I have zero insight into this, but if these are administrative type people who have always worked for the State then I can understand how this is happening. The talent exists in Sweden to actually solve these issues at a reasonable cost. But are the administrators of the state bureaucracy able to select and empower those people? That I don't know.

Per Thilander

Researcher at Centre for Global HRM at School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University

2w

Tyvärr inte så mycket nytt under solen, läs GWs krönika Drunkad i pappersfloden

Marisa Ponti

Core areas: AI and Data Science for Public Policy; Participatory Science

1w
See more comments

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore topics