Now it is clear that hardly any business can do without automation computer systems. However, a successful creation of automated control system does not always depend on the success of the business itself or on the ideas of the company's management. The main reasons are a strongly artificial division between business management technology and computer systems, and neglect of the human factor. We can certainly blame a succession of generations, an adaptation of an average person, psychological barriers, etc. But it seems to me, that we simply put little effort to break the gap "person – software" ("person - computer") and to reach a mutual understanding between programmers and managers, between technologists and system analytics. 
 
In the near future it will hardly be possible to develop intellectual software, which could sufficiently reduce the volume of routine operations, as the applied mathematical device almost does not allow practical implementation from the point of view of associative decision-making pattern. However, the last century has seen a certain progress: indistinct logic, fractals, and neuron networks - remarkable tools, which are still used for simple operations or even not used at all, as we understand that they are good tools, but we do not know, how they can help us solve our essential problems. The most important question is whether we trust the obtained results. People have not always considered the temperature of a human body as a health parameter.
 
On the other hand, we should understand the basic organization of human society, the main construction principles of management hierarchies, as well as the interrelations between different people and between experts. Quite often universal and flexible use implied in the software may stump and frighten the user, rather than help him solve his problems, because he should be able either to set the necessary options himself or to formulate his own demands using the terms, which computer experts would understand, and the latter can be the most difficult. "Experience", states Microsoft; however the menus have not got less complicated, while in my daily work I need only those options, which I constantly use. For example, while preparing this text I hardly used more than ten commands. I cannot get what the other commands are for? Though I have to admit that there is a certain progress - intellectual menus, meta tags, XML, T9 technology of text input, etc. For me the best program is the one which has only one button ("execute") and a field for input of certain commands which the program should execute. (Thus, I have simplified the management of my own web site so that now its support requires PDA alone.)
 
Thus, the requirements of the final user (his management) should be considered before creating an automated control system. It is necessary to determine the aims of the company's activity, as well as the basic concepts of work organization. In case the system is likely to make a staff member spend more time on certain operations, increase his responsibility and fear of misunderstanding; the question is whether he will need this system. And if the head of the company also does not consider the introduction of this system necessary, the cost of the latter becomes a zero within the framework of this company or its division.
 
At the initial stages it is necessary to explain to a staff member that automation processes are comparable to a doctor's treatment - though painful, terrible and time-consuming, but able to make the work easier. He should be aware of the results he can obtain: economy of his working time, increase of his labor productivity, and as a result possible career changes. However, it is not quite clear, why treatment is easily accepted by everyone (from yard cleaners up to presidents), while it is not all the same with the creation of information control systems, why do not people understand that the latter is comparable to a treatment of a company, management, economy. If I know more, then I can make decisions more quickly and more correctly, accordingly the efficiency of my business will grow and I will earn more money, which means that my live conditions will get better.
 
Certainly, it is clear that it is the person who finally determines any process. We can create a perfect program, but an ordinary associate of a warehouse in our company will fail to put in the data or put in wrong data, an all our efforts will be in vain. Such things may actually happen. For example, R/3 system implemented in one metallurgical plant is used only for printing waybills in steel-melting section. That is all the experts who introduced this system at the given enterprise get. On the other hand, automation processes are usually determined by correct management, as there are certain situations when the head of a company should give some order or insist on his own decision or take other organizational measures. However, the management of the company cannot always properly organize and check automation processes, besides it should not be their function (as they say - divide the responsibilities between your associates and be the master). These functions should be performed by technologists who deal in control systems. There is always someone who organizes a company and is responsible for it, and someone who formalizes and operates it. On the one hand, a man, who has spent all his life making wine, does not know how to automate his own business and cannot even imagine computers working. On the other, those engaged in programming either do not know or do not want to know how the wine maker creates his perfect product and defines its quality by tasting it. What should be done in this situation?
 
The responsibility for success in this case lies down on experts engaged in joining the production with its management and in formalization of business processes, as well as problem statement for programmers; it is their function to choose methods of expansion and introduction of computer systems. They are management technologists, pedants by nature, who should know all about the company's activity. There are plenty of methods, which can be used. One of them, for example, implies stimulating of active associates and fining of passive ones. It is possible to apply some game schemes or methods implying rigid sanctions or smooth penetration into technological processes, etc. However, one should always consider specific features of an object of automation; otherwise he can get negative results as well. The situation when passive associates are prevailing and the chosen method implies progressive introduction, may result in a strike or something of the kind ("the bottom level does not want, the top level is unable"). We should always understand, that the system "person - software" ("person - computer") is a whole as well as such systems as "person - doctor" or "person - teacher", as the software is a sort of a medicine which help understand the processes of production and realization of goods in the market, fight ignorance or imprecise formalization of technologies, increase the labor efficiency, thus providing opportunities to earn more and to live better.

Last modified: 12.01.2003
Translation by Elena Polyanskaya