That’s a question that people often ask in exasperation when some piece of technology fails to fulfill its purpose, or has some obvious problem.
It’s not a question that people on the outside can answer for sure. After all, something can be tested and a problem can be reported, but management might decide that there are bigger fish to fry and that, despite the problem, the product is good enough.
On the other hand, some problems are manifest, embarrassing, and easy to fix — so much so that it’s hard to believe that developers or managers could have decided “Nah, that’s fine.”
Here’s an example, courtesy of the Canada Revenue Agency. When I press Send without selecting one of the radio buttons, an error message (in red text) appears. It’s positioned above the topmost radio button, such that the button can’t be selected. There is a workaround; select a different radio button; then the message gets cleared; then the top button can be selected.
I’ve been a developer. From my perspective, it’s hard to believe that a developer tested his/her work, saw this behaviour, and shrugged. I’ve been a program manager, too. From that perspective, it’s hard to believe that a program manager received a report of this behaviour and said “That’s fine.” After all, this is the face of an agency that people depend on for accuracy and reliability, and that, accordingly must display evidence of trustworthy behaviour and high competence.
It’s much easier for me to believe that the system was rushed to deployment with inadequate, negligent testing, and that the behaviour was never observed or reported. No matter what, though, it doesn’t seems to represent careful, conscientious work across the board.
And don’t get me started on the unhelpful results from the chatbot; the risk of it giving wrong answers; and the fact that no one will be held responsible for its errors. “Please note that the information provided by this chatbot is for informational purposes only and should not be considered as official records or tax advice.” The information is for informational purposes? What does that even mean?
How long will it be before we recognize that capable, engaged, well-trained, helpful people are worth paying for?
