The Obstacle Course of Progress
Sarah is leaning into the clinical blue glow of her dual monitors at 8:06 AM, her right index finger twitching with the ghost of 26 clicks she’s already performed just to navigate to the ‘Client Notes’ section of the new enterprise suite. Her knuckles are white. The air in the office feels recycled, tasting of static and burnt coffee, yet she is focused on the screen with a ferocity that suggests she is decoding the secrets of the universe. In reality, she is trying to find a text box that doesn’t exist.
The system, which the company spent exactly $2,000,006 to license and implement over the last 36 weeks, was promised to be the ‘Single Source of Truth.’ It was supposed to-excuse me, it was presumed to-liberate the workforce from the shackles of manual entry and legacy bottlenecks. Instead, it has become a digital obstacle course where every 16 seconds, a loading wheel spins with the indifferent leisure of a ceiling fan in a humid lobby.
The Specialized Facial Expression
I’ve spent the better part of this week perfecting the art of the ‘thoughtful squint’ whenever my supervisor passes my desk. It’s a specialized facial expression-a furrowed brow combined with a slight tilt of the head-that signals I am deep in the heart of a complex logic problem, when I am actually just wondering if I left the back door unlocked or why I’m being forced to use a platform that requires 56 separate permissions to change a font color. We are all performing this dance. We are all digitizing our dysfunction and calling it progress.
“
Companies don’t actually want to solve problems; they want to pay for the feeling of having solved them. A $2,000,006 invoice is a very heavy, very convincing feeling.
– Sophie K.-H., Disaster Recovery Coordinator
Sophie K.-H., our disaster recovery coordinator, has spent 16 years watching these cycles of technological self-immolation. She sits in an office decorated with 106-page manuals for systems that no longer exist, a graveyard of ‘transformative’ solutions.
Automating the Dysfunction
This isn’t a failure of the code, usually. It’s a refusal to have the hard, human conversations about why the workflow was broken in the first place. If your sales process is a chaotic mess of ego and redundant communication, putting it on the cloud doesn’t fix it; it just makes the chaos accessible from your phone. We’ve automated the friction. We’ve turned the ‘broken’ into the ‘standardized broken.’ Sophie K.-H. often notes that the disaster she’s coordinating isn’t a server crash, but the slow, agonizing death of common sense under the weight of 126 mandatory dropdown menus.
The Efficiency Lie
I recently found myself staring at a report that claimed our new system had increased efficiency by 46%. It was a beautiful chart, rendered in 16 shades of corporate blue. I looked at that chart, then I looked at Sarah, who was currently copy-pasting data from the ‘Unified Dashboard’ back into her ‘Illegal’ spreadsheet because the dashboard didn’t have a print function. The 46% increase was a lie calculated by the software itself, a self-congratulatory loop of data points that ignored the reality of the humans sitting in the chairs.
Clarity Over Clicks
This is where the philosophy of precision and human-centric design comes in. In a world where corporate software often feels like a blunt instrument-a sledgehammer used to hang a picture frame-true innovation looks more like the bespoke alignment of technology and human perception. This requires a level of care that is often absent in the ‘move fast and break things’ culture of digital transformation.
It reminds me of the standards set by visual field analysis, where the integration of advanced technology is handled with a surgical focus on enhancing the human experience rather than complicating it. There, the tech (like ZEISS) isn’t there to create more clicks; it’s there to provide a clarity that was previously impossible. It’s about the result-the vision-not the interface.
Most corporate software ignores this. It treats the user as a data-entry drone whose time has no value. If it takes Sarah 26 minutes to do a 6-minute task, the software vendor doesn’t care. They already have the $2,000,006. The subscription fee is locked in for the next 36 months. The ‘Transformation’ is complete on paper, even if the office is now 116% more frustrated than it was during the era of paper files and fax machines.
“We are all performing this dance. We are all digitizing our dysfunction and calling it progress.”
The Spreadsheet is Not the Problem
Perhaps the spreadsheet is the last bastion of human agency in a world of locked-down interfaces. Sarah’s Google Sheet is a work of art. It has conditional formatting that she wrote herself. It has macros that actually work. It doesn’t require a 26-page white paper to explain why the ‘Save’ button is hidden in a sub-menu under ‘Account Settings.’ It is a tool she owns, rather than a system that owns her time.
When we spend $2,000,006 on software, we aren’t just buying code; we are buying a set of constraints. We are forcing a diverse group of 1,026 employees to think in exactly the same way, regardless of whether that way makes any sense for their specific department.
I’ve often wondered if we could just give everyone that $2,000,006 as a bonus and let them keep using their spreadsheets. The efficiency would probably skyrocket by 116%. But then, the leadership wouldn’t have anything to present at the annual general meeting. You can’t put ‘We let Sarah keep her Google Sheet’ on a PowerPoint slide with a picture of a rocket ship. You need the ‘Digital Transformation Roadmap.’ You need the subscription fee.
Paying for Resilience
Yesterday, the system went down for 46 minutes. The IT department sent out an emergency alert, 16 emails deep, warning everyone to stay calm. In the office, nothing changed. No one panicked. No one even noticed. Because everyone was already working in their spreadsheets.
We had achieved the ultimate digital transformation: a system so expensive and complex that its total absence had zero impact on the daily operations of the company. Sophie K.-H. just laughed. She was busy updating a 16-cell table on her own monitor, her fingers moving with a fluid, rhythmic grace that the $2,000,006 software could never hope to emulate.
The Three Pillars of Failure
Constraint
Buying systems means buying limitations.
Illusion
The efficiency report is a self-serving narrative.
Agency
The true work happens in the tools we own.
We are currently paying a subscription fee for our own resilience. We are paying to pretend that the software is doing the work, while we continue to do it the same way we always have, just with more steps and less sleep. At some point, the gap between the ‘System of Record’ and the ‘System of Reality’ becomes too wide to bridge. When that happens, you don’t need a software update. You need a mirror.
The Final Hour
I look at the clock. It’s 4:56 PM. I’ve spent the last 36 minutes staring at the same page of the manual, making sure to blink every 6 seconds so the eye-tracking software on my laptop doesn’t flag me as ‘disengaged.’ I am a master of the ghost in the machine. I am the human element that the ‘Digital Transformation’ forgot to account for, and I have a spreadsheet that says I’m doing a great job.