In The Age Of The Smart Machine: The Future Of Work And Power Paperback – October 2, 1989

Worth repeated readings. Extremely illuminating.

Dr. Zuboff has written an influential book. Unfortunately, she makes many of the assumptions that have permeated social science since at least Skinner.Computers, and their use, have transformed many industries, and have impacted many lives. The problem with Zuboff's analysis, however, is that computers, even those that analyze metadata, are data machines. People are not.For example, data that may be “informative” for an accountant might be gibberish to a salesperson (and vice versa).Poor decision making results when information is confused with data. That is, if you and I look at the same picture (or number, or document, or YouTube clip) we are assumed to be sharing the same information. This is patent nonsense.For example, data about layoffs may provide one item of information to investors (possibly, “Management is finally getting costs under control.”), while the same data may provide an entirely different item of information to a worker (possibly, “I better look for another job.”).There are a good deal of insights that may be had from "In The Age of the Smart Machine". Be wary, however. Computers are not "smart" in the ways that people are "smart". Assuming that they are can lead to unfortunate decisions, in business, in government, and in social contexts.

This book can be so challenging to get and it's such a shame! Ultimately this book is about knowing, expertise, decision making, and the nature of work. Zuboff describes two paper/pulp mills - a traditional versus a state of the art.In the traditional mill, workers knew their plant and the quality of the pulp by smell, touch, and sound. Their experience, senses, and history informed their decision making. In the state of the art plant, operators made decisions through the use of data displayed on computer screens - they didn't have the same sensory association with plant operations and/or pulp processing as the older workers. Similarly, older workers could not look at a data printout and tell you what the #s meant in terms of plant status, maintenance, or pulp processing.Zuboff, affords a rich opportunity to understand generational differences in work, knowledge, expertise, and decision making. Workers' ways of knowing and their sense of reality about the way they approach work can be fundamentally different. As a consultant helping clients adopt technology - I found this book invaluable in the specific ways it helped me understanda) individual differences in learning, knowing, and sense of reality;b) the very real differences between sensory knowing and data driven understanding;c) the resistance to change - not just a harrumph but a real sense of disorientation and fear related to a way of knowing and thinking that can be very different;d) strategies for helping people navigate change and learn new ways such as bridging old ways of thinking and knowing with new ways; the importance of a phased approach rather than all or nothing; ande) the human side of organizations - this book increased my sensitivity to workers places within what we are doing, their values, and the valuing of their real responses to change.A truly excellent, eye opening book. I recommend this book for any leader or consultant who leads change, implements projects that introduce workplace changes, or those just interested in understanding worker knowing, learning, and decision making.

Zuboff saw further and deeper than any of her contemporaries, and she coupled her insights with a compassionate and sensitive take on people whose work and lives was disrupted by technology. This is what good scholarship looks like.

System engineers and business process people will find a wealth of insights and case studies on how to make systems humane and usable. This is a must read. It explains how poor design can cause users to "fudge" their input to make them look good and explains the effects of human dissatisfaction as a result of poor systems design.

Ok...

Turgid, long-winded, discursive, not particularly perceptive (much of it is pointing out the obvious) and way too many anecdotes in place of real evidence. It is not a terrible book. It is just 300 pages too long for what it has to say.