Thanks, John – you clearly outline many of the reasons why military culture might react poorly to the idea of surrendering decision-making power to an algorithm. One additional reason I might add is that there could be concerns about an algorithm taking away stable government jobs, particularly in towns where the military is the largest employer. How can military leadership best make the case that people analytics can actually improve force readiness?
Thanks for writing this post, Aurora! I agree with your analysis, and it made me think about when we think it’s acceptable for employee behavior to be tracked. I keep thinking about what our visitor from Microsoft said about how low-skill labor has always been under surveillance, and we’re only uncomfortable now that white collar jobs are being monitored. I think your distinction of “if employees are paid by the hour, it’s reasonable for employers to monitor what they’re doing” makes sense.
Really interesting – I can imagine this being a really useful tool. It feels like an extension of an app on your phone that reminds you to stand up or drink water every hour, but more personalized to your own goals.
But I also wonder what Humu replaces – are front-line staff not getting coaching from mangers, but just automated pushes? How does this change how we think about people development? I can imagine Humu eventually undermining an organization’s ability to promote from within if lower-level employees are just pushed to perform certain tasks versus developing broad-based competencies.