BPM.com
  1. Peter Schooff
  2. Sherlock Holmes
  3. BPM Discussions
  4. Tuesday, 08 January 2019
  5.  Subscribe via email
Do you think voice recognition technology will fundamentally change how we interact with business processes?
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
Yes, but selectively.

Not in open areas in healthcare settings where others can hear what is being dictated, but no problem with 'next, next' commands. Not at homicide crime scenes where the accused, the victim, relatives of either, or the media might hear.
Comment
  1. one week ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 1
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
No, but selectively voice interactions will play part in improving efficiency and just maybe the user experience? However people in their actions and decisions are and will always be the fundamental aspect in delivering the desired good outcomes in the end to end business processes.
Comment
  1. one week ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 2
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
The first thing that comes to my mind is the interaction between buyers (people in their homes) and online webshops, where the individual basically dictates what they want to buy and by doing this interact with the customer facing processes from the seller. It would not surprise me if that becomes more significant in the near future.

When I think about the organzation's side of things, I can't imagine that agents in a customer service center (in an open office setting) are all babbling to a device to do their work and execute their own processes. I'm afraid that this would not lead to really satisfied customer service agents.

In short, I'm not entirely convinced that voice will ever play a big role, and I think I will hold out until neural-cognitive recognition is here (reading my mind with a discretely placed simple sensor). Trust me, I am an extrovert person (really extrovert) but I still feel very silly when I try to talk to my Smart watch at loud in an attempt to set a countdown timer, so why would I start to extensively talk to a device in order to manage or execute my business processes.
BPM is all about mindset first and toolset later....much later
Comment
  1. one week ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 3
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
Voice tech is about user interface - this is of course having an impact on business process interaction.

But to a very limited extent.

Voice tech is an AI play and AI plays are games of large numbers - investments are being put into meaningful interactions in English, Chinese and (maybe?) Spanish. Not much else.
CEO, Co-founder, Profluo
Comment
  1. one week ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 4
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
The easy and obvious answer is yes. The more complex question is whether the use of voice will be explicit or ambient. In other words, will Big Brother be always on.
Comment
  1. one week ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 5
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
I fully agree with Bogdan - TTS and STT have a measurable impact on a front end level. The degree of reaped benefits, taking into account the entire process components (logical process maps, forms, variables, decision trees, data and reports), will however depend on the given usage scenario and will likely to be marginal in most cases. Text intensive, case management solutions and text mining (sentiment analytics and so forth) applications will surely benefit the most.
NSI Soluciones - ABPMP PTY
Comment
  1. one week ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 6
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
What is the job that needs to be done? Push a business process forward -- in other words, "perform the work of business". Let's assume that the "work of business" is not going to change. In that case then, as @Bogdan says, it's a UX question. Compare different situations where we want to progress a business process. For example, on both ends of a complexity spectrum: filling out a complex form versus a "yes/no" judgement.

Now we can model how voice will impact on business process. In the case of a complex form, the technology doesn't work well enough yet to be demonstrably better. HOWEVER, for simple interactions which require human judgement, the LATENCY and COGNITIVE/MANUAL WORK INTERACTION COST of voice can be much lower!. "Siri" or "Alexa", "we need more printer's ink" (i.e. a procurement process). Think of this as lower "friction". One doesn't have to retrieve a phone, or sit at a desk. Processes can now be successfully deployed at a much finer level of granularity. This change in process control technology has the potential to affect process use cases, to the point that vast numbers of "micro-human services" will become newly economically deployable.

SUMMARY: Voice can dramatically lower simple human process interaction costs. This enables whole new categories of micro-services that were previously not viable. This is a fundamental change to how we "work with processes". Or more generally "how we work". And there are big business opportunities.

#UX #JOBSTOBEDONE #INTERACTIONCOST #LATENCY #USEREXPERIENCE #CUSTOMEREXPERIENCE #MICROSERVICES
Comment
@John. Looking at the responses, I'm not seeing much difference between "Siri . . ." and going to one's smartphone and picking "Order Printer's Ink" from a menu of services.

Climbing up on a Blackhawk helicopter with tools/instruments but wearing a headset. on the other hand, and there is a huge benefit to voice (remember - "busier than a long-tailed cat in a roomful of rocking chairs")

The big savings are in the workflow template that gets called.

I am perplexed daily when I go into places and see users with laptops using the keypad to navigate instead of a mouse

Equally perplexed when I see someone at a smartphone trying to type up a paragraph. Smartphone pens are not much better (except for folks with large fingers) .

No point having a customer-facing "efficient" UI unless you have a similarly "efficient" UI for internal users.

All of this is a big change from the days where my partner and I would not hire anyone the dog did not like.
  1. John Morris
  2. 1 week ago
  3. #5870
@Walter - good notes on matching the right interface to the right task. As for asking a virtual assistant, via voice, to perform a task versus doing the same thing on the phone, the phone requires a significantly greater involvement: at minimum, device retrieval, password, navigation. Whereas by contrast a voice interaction can be immediate and ambient. Multiply this by dozens or hundreds of times a day for specific work roles and you will have real advantage. Voice is mainly adopted now in the B2C space, and I don't see that voice is much advantage to highly optimized process environments such as insurance claim processing. However, newly automated or augmented B2B work roles where hands-free is an advantage (e.g. field service or healthcare) will find a home for voice technology, especially when supported by "AI". And, per my usual emphasis on process-as-work, all these things can be seen as workflow or process automation.
It is important that all UIs are customized for the specific task which is an important element of "adaptive". This could encourage opportunities to using "voice"?
  1. one week ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 7
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
An interesting mix of 'yes' and 'no' in responses so far. Of course, the answer is always 'It depends' ;-)

How about this scenario: A large (10s of thousands employees) organisation has an unsatisfied desire for management information (operational) reports. Who is doing well, individually, teams and locations? Are we doing better than last year in absolute terms? In per GBP terms? Gathering the raw information for that is currently painful for all concerned and results in poor data quality. Front line staff are relatively low paid and not highly motivated. But at the same time, although innate skill requirements may be low, significant training is required for to get the job done. It's not a call centre where ambient noise or being overheard is a problem.

Yes, I think voice is a very significant interface.

But I can't help thinking the _really_ interesting thing is that multiple user interfaces to suit different scenarios will continue to drive API-centric apps. And in context of BPM making those APIs domain-centric rather than technology-centric continues to be frequently neglected. But I digress..., that's another question.
Comment
  1. one week ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 8
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
The Voice is interesting aspect how we interact with the digital world... here the most people understand the voice as spoken language. There are other aspects of sound than the command and control...e.g. in near future we can interpret the "voice" to judge if the person is telling the truth or is he lying... the voice also conveys emotions, we can develop an AI app to help customer service people to serve better customer...maybe in security sensitive cases we may recognize the stress levels fostering to make mistakes... One aspect is to interpret the sound landscape e.g. in some cities they try to recognize gun fire... the advantage of the sound is that we do not need to have visible connection to the source. This may have further applications in self-driving cars and equipment malfunction analysis...

br. Kai
Comment
  1. one week ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 9
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
Absolutely. Already happened. Voice is ultimately the tool to drive interaction with technology applications. Keyboards will decrease significantly though not disappear. Yes, there are plenty of system to system interactions but I am talking about human to technology applications. IVR was the first big step of using voice to initiate process. IVR is not perfect but a lot of calls are handled by IVR and resolved. Siri, Alexa, etc are changing the way we initiate applications and do work for us. Put aside the security and big brother issue and I believe we will see that voice is becoming a significant mechanism to initiate and drive process. I would bet moore's law got its sights on voice ! the impact of voice will double every two years......
Comment
  1. one week ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 10
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
Absolutely yes, because verbal communication is how we are best designed to interact. Humankind communicated verbally for hundreds of thousands of years before writing evolved. Only for the last 2 or 3 millennia has written information become the dominant technique for making permanent records, communicating from one to many or over long distances. But its days are numbered.
Why? The average person can type at 40 words per minute, but we can speak at anything between 100 to 150. A fast reader can easily manage 200+ words a minute, but we can listen to and comprehend around 400. Try checking both of these out for yourselves.
And that's why voice interaction and intuitive image displays will quickly transition from fighter pilots' helmets to more everyday activities- just look at gaming!
Comment
"verbal communication is how we are best designed to interact" - agree, but among humans, not with machines.
With all the AI in the world, the day when the line between machines and humans becomes blurred is beyond my lifetime.
  1. one week ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 11
  • Page :
  • 1


There are no replies made for this post yet.
However, you are not allowed to reply to this post.