Robots Want Your Job

Published in Investing Strategy on 28 October 2009

However skilled your job is, at some stage it could be done by computer.

The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed -- William Gibson

For many years when you went to the checkout till in the supermarket an employee punched the price of every item into a cash register. Today they use barcode scanning equipment and some supermarkets operate self-service checkouts where shoppers scan their own goods.

Tesco (LSE: TSCO) recently went one step further by opening a store which does not employ any checkout staff, forcing every shopper to use the scanners. "Roboshop" is raising concerns because it requires fewer workers but far worse is in store for supermarket employees. Already some warehouses use robots to remove goods from shelves so it's just a matter of time before supermarkets are using robot shelf-stackers. Ultimately the humans working in a supermarket will mostly be robot supervisors and mechanics.

Whatever your job is there's a good chance that you could be replaced by a robot within the next decade or two. Developments in robotics and artificial intelligence will affect many highly skilled jobs which were thought to be safe from automation. This is bad news for workers but great news for shareholders, particularly because robots don't need cigarette breaks, pay rises or time off and robots don't go on strike!

Need To Cut Costs? Buy A Robot

Ever since the Industrial Revolution businesses have needed to control their costs to avoid losing business to lower-cost competitors. When mill owners installed machines to replace skilled textile workers with cheaper unskilled workers the outcome was the Luddite revolution and in 1812 more British troops were engaged against the Luddites than were fighting Napoleon in the Iberian Peninsula.

Most workers have skills which can be replicated to some degree by robots and/or expert systems (computer programs with weak artificial intelligence (AI) which can match human capabilities in a very limited area of expertise). Some businesses already use weak AI systems; investment banks use weak AI to sort through data and if you've ever talked to a voice-recognition system over the telephone you've run into a weak AI, a computer program that interprets speech and acts accordingly.

Weak AI programs will remove the need for many human employees; good news for shareholders in labour intensive businesses as this permits them to cut their costs dramatically by getting rid of many of their staff. Of course, this is terrible news for those employees who lose their jobs. Such is progress.

Even Highly Skilled Jobs Are Not Safe

Consider the skilled parts of your job. If these skills can be broken down into a process that you can represent in a flowchart, however, complex, then the day will come when a robot or computer program will perform these tasks more efficiently and at a lower cost.

If that sounds shocking bear in mind that many highly skilled jobs largely consist of interpreting data in a mechanical manner. Your local doctor spends much of her time getting patients to describe their symptoms and armed with this information the GP searches through her memory, books and databases to determine the condition(s) that these symptoms describe and thus the course of treatment to prescribe. These symptoms can be punched into an expert system, programmed with medical knowledge, to obtain a diagnosis, and many people do something similar nowadays by typing their symptoms into an internet search engine and seeing what information comes back.

The medical profession endeavours to cast doubt upon internet self-diagnosis, not purely to point out the unreliability of many online sources but also to protect their own interests. Whilst the easy availability of online medical information causes some people to suffer from cyberchondria, you can expect to see cheap, reliable, medical diagnostic systems in a supermarket near you in the next few years.

Military pilots are increasingly being replaced by unmanned drones that are operated from thousands of miles away by controllers who require less training (i.e. cheaper staff). Qinetiq (LSE: QQ) produces in military robots, primarily for bomb disposal, and it looks as if armed robots that exercise their own judgment will soon appear on the battlefield. Put the two together and you've got a robot air force (and far less demand for human pilots).

Bad News For The Unskilled

What happens to the displaced workers? Trade unions and employment law can protect jobs to some extent but it is curtains for a lot of jobs. However, many of these workers will find work elsewhere because technological change will create new industries and thus new opportunities. The problem is that many people firmly believe in the lump of labour fallacy, the false assumption that the total amount of available work in an economy is fixed, and these people will probably become the new Luddites and fight the introduction of robots into the workplace.

It's never been a good time to be unskilled and poorly educated, but it's going to become a lot worse, and these people will find it difficult to find new jobs (hint: get some skills). Change is coming and it won't be stopped. If you think that the march of the robots into the workplace will be halted you might wish to consider why light bulbs aren't banned in order to protect candle makers' jobs!

More from Tony Luckett:

Share & subscribe

Comments

The opinions expressed here are those of the individual writers and are not representative of The Motley Fool. If you spot any comments that are unsuitable hit the flag to alert our moderators.

UncleEbenezer 28 Oct 2009 , 11:24am

From an employee's POV, how is that any different to Outsourcing to India? Or the many other countries that have become dominant in various activities over the years.

We just have to move on.

LastChip 28 Oct 2009 , 5:00pm

While I agree in principal with the thrust of this article, there are some areas that are not quite so clear cut.

First, artificial intelligence (ai) (as has been hinted) is at a very low level compared to even the dimmest of humans and it's likely to be years before that is going to significantly improve.

A few years back, I was privileged to witness leading edge ai at one of our universities, and while it was very impressive, the researchers would be the first admit, they are a long, long way from approaching anything remotely like the human capability.

Robots are not in themselves artificially intelligent. they're simply programed to conduct repetitive tasks and have been successfully used in manufacturing. However, they have a very high capital cost and maintenance cost. So whether a shop worker at for example £6 an hour, could be replaced by a robotand be cost effective, is open to discussion. Self scanning is undoubtedly becoming more common place, but I wonder whether shop lifting increases as a result? And, if you take it to the ultimate and do away with checkout staff altogether, what happens to security then?

It is reasonable to predict staff will become less, but whether you will ever see a shop void of all staff; I remain unconvinced.

There is never-the-less a wider issue.

We are being brainwashed into accepting everyone will need to work until they are in their late sixties or even seventy. If the population needs to work longer and automation reduces the available jobs, how is it all going to work?

I don't have any answers; do you?

BarrenFluffit 28 Oct 2009 , 6:45pm

Self scanning doesn't represent automation. Its merely shifting operation of the machine from paid staff to unpaid customers. Personally if I wanted to scan shopping I'd want to get paid for it.

JudgeDreddd 29 Oct 2009 , 8:09am

Self-scanning constitutes automation because a machine substitutes for an employee. Customers now do the scanning. Getting customers to do your work is a long-established business method.

Anti-shoplifting techniques (I prefer to call it burglary, since that what it is in law) will be boosted with greater use of RFID chips and security scanning.

In a while self-scanning will become obsolete, customers will simply walk through airport-style security scanners which will read the RFID chips.
Of course, there'll be RFID hacking (it's a never ending battle!)

Wheree weak AI will score big is in expert systems. There's no need for an expert system to be anything more than a very efficient data analysis, storage and retrieval system. These systems will replace a lot of skilled work, including the likes of medical diagnosis and legal conveyancing.

The professions will dig in, but its ultimately a losing battle because it can be sent to other countries if needs be.

Who wants to pay £150 an hour for will drafting when an expert system in Sainsburys will do it for £20 flat rate?

BrnzDrgn 29 Oct 2009 , 4:17pm

Fine, but the problems arise in defining the varied options available in will writing and work. Many jobs in Food Factories could be done by machines - but they lack the dexterity and adaptability of human workers. Also you have to consider the initial investment and upkeep of these systems. Robots are not cheap and though they can be more consistant they often can be a lower standard than a skilled person and after training a person often does not need retraining to adapt to varied jobs (note robots tend to be better for repetitive fixed tasks). AI is in its very very early stages and neural nets tend to be very basic and have to be trained. Sony's robot can do some of what a person can do but is very very expensive and still runs into doors and it is state of the art. I think there is a lot of wishful thinking in this article - it's a bit like tomorrows world - where is my flying car or even the robot to clean my house (no not the rhoomba unless I design my house to make it work effectively), it's simply not there yet. We may get more gadgets, but I think the types of ideas here are way off. And the third world - well as their cost of living rises they are becoming much less competitive.

MissingOz 30 Oct 2009 , 11:33am

I'd like to know what skills WILL be valuable in the future. Telling us what WON'T be valuable is only one half of the equation, and therefore useless.
Robot technicians? Artists? Storytellers?

lumplabor 02 Nov 2009 , 6:58am

Wow, what a mixed up telling of the lump-of-labor fable! The whole point of the technology-creates-more-jobs-than-it-destroys platitude is to falsely reassure people. Here, Tony Luckett pulls out the scare tactics and then makes fun of people for being scared. I have a feeling robots are already doing his job. Not very bright ones.

JudgeDreddd 01 Jan 2010 , 6:00pm

A bit late in replying but I can assure people that

1) I am not a robot

2) It's not scare tactics; some very skilled people will be replaced by robots, just as the demand for weavers has dropped since the introduction of the loom (just put your symptoms into Google to see what's coming

JD

Join the conversation

Please take note - some tags have changed.

Line breaks are converted automatically.

You may use the following tags in your post: [b]bolded text[/b], [i]italicised text[/i]. All other tags will be removed from your post.

If you want to add a link, please ensure you type it as http://www.fool.co.uk as opposed to www.fool.co.uk.

Hello stranger

To add your own comment, please login.

Not yet registered? Register now.