One of the most interesting books by Richard Sennett I’ve read is The Craftsman. It is too easy to think of a craftsperson as someone who is very skilled, that is, to focus on their skills, while what they really are is someone who takes flawed and particular materials and knows how to accommodate, to work around those flaws so as to make something virtually perfect. This is an incredibly important idea and so I’m going to stress it a bit since this bespoke notion of the craftsperson is central to the idea of what a professional is in this book. A craftsperson is someone who applies their skill to the particularity of the circumstances they are confronted with – the grain of the stone, the maturity of the wood, the coarseness of the fibres – and they are then able to make a bespoke product from these materials, adjusting their technique to the requirements and limitations of the materials at hand. Now, this is the opposite of the way products are manufactured in industry. The division of labour requires ‘standardised inputs’. If a craftsperson is able to produce a product that incorporates and embraces the flaws in the raw materials it is required to deal with, industrial manufacture is universal because it standardises these inputs so as to also standardise the outputs.
Repeatedly throughout this book the authors stress that the key unifying idea of a professional is that they provide bespoke solutions to their clients’ problems. Some of this depends on a professional’s access to knowledge that is difficult to acquire, and since we all live in a complex society, it is important that some of us specialise in acquiring that knowledge. Often this isn’t explicit knowledge that you pay for, but rather tacit knowledge – that is, the professional can’t tell you how they know, but they still know all the same. This might sound like professionals trying to justify their advantages and hide the source of those advantages, but actually, tacit knowledge is a very important human skill. Tacit knowledge comes out of experience, in fact, enough experience that we are often unable to put into words what it is we ‘just do’. And since we find it impossible to describe or even know we are using this tacit knowledge, it is difficult to see how we could program a computer to do it.
And that is the interesting thing about this book. They repeatedly make the point that AI doesn’t have to do things in the same way that humans do them to get the same or even better results. The point out that humans can’t beat a computer at chess, but not because the computer plays chess like a human – it really doesn’t – it plays chess like a computer – crunching millions of combinations via brute computational force. And so, the Turing test overstates the problem – even if we know the computer is a computer it can still be, in effect, more intelligent than we are. That is, in much the same way that industrial manufacture isn’t the same as craft manufacture, it isn’t that the output needs to be identical to the output of a craftsperson, but it does matter that the output is fit for purpose. That is, knowing the difference between a handcrafted lampshade and a manufactured one doesn’t necessarily mean I’m going to always choose the handcrafted one.
The authors tell one of those management stories that they use to explain this idea early in the book – where some management consulting firm is talking to a meeting of executives from a power tool company and they show the executives some photos of a drill and ask, ‘is this what you sell to your customers?’ The executives assume this is some sort of trick, but eventually agree that it is – to which the consultants say, ‘no, you sell the hole in the wall, the drill is just your latest way of making that hole’. Yeah, yeah. But the authors make good use of this story as they go on – so, what is the hole that professions sell their clients? And to what extent will technology be able make that ‘hole’ in ways that will not require professionals to work or engage with their clients in the ways that they do today?
A point they make is that there is likely to be latent demand in the economy. That is, people, who would like to go see a doctor or a lawyer or one of any other groups of professionals, but who can’t simply because such bespoke services from professionals are insanely expensive. And that the extreme expense of professional services makes these services remarkably unevenly distributed in society, which in turn works against our society being fair or democratic. As such, the shift towards redesigning these services so that they can be provided by information systems is likely to provide huge benefits for a wide number of people across society. And that this democratising of access to professional advice is going to be hard to stop as communication technology becomes increasingly all-pervasive.
They also make the point that professional workers generally seek to stress the bespoke aspects of their work – you know, the accountant who needed to do the accounting version of a triple back summersault with a pike to ensure the maximum tax return for their client – whereas, in reality and overall, most of the tasks associated with their job are routine and fairly simple. That is, the authors aren’t saying that all professional jobs will necessarily disappear in the next few years, but what they are saying is that a great many of the tasks that professionals do are able to be taken from them by network design, AI, process re-engineering and so on. As such, the work that professionals do is likely to change significantly and even if this doesn’t eliminate their jobs entirely, it will significantly change those jobs, probably to the point where they are barely recognisable.
Basically, this book provides us with a vision into the future presenting a kind of Fordist reshaping of professional work. A lot of what I’ve been reading lately has stressed that most of the jobs that are about to disappear due to automation are those in the middle – that is, the paraprofessionals, rather than the professionals. The reasoning being that paraprofessionals generally do routine work professionals avoid. However, this book thinks paraprofessionals may have more going for them than we imagine. They are cheaper than professionals, they are highly trained in the specific tasks they perform – in much the same way that the division of labour in factories broke down complex craft skills into smaller and simpler ones – and they are also often required to have more interpersonal skills than the ‘content knowledge specialists’ who are the true professionals. This level of simplification of work roles and specialisation of individual tasks is exactly what the Fordist industrial revolution brought for us at the turn of the last century in turning crafts into a division of labour – and so it isn’t clear why it wouldn’t do much the same when it is being applied to professional work.
This book provides a useful discussion of what a professional is, it gives a history of the development of professions and also compelling visions of how they are likely to change over the coming decades. This is a seriously interesting book.