Where machines could replace humans—and where they can’t (yet)
PART
I
The technical potential for automation differs
dramatically across sectors and activities.
As automation technologies such as machine learning and robotics play an increasingly
great role in everyday life, their potential effect on the workplace has,
unsurprisingly, become a major focus of research and public concern. The
discussion tends toward a Manichean guessing game: which jobs will or won’t be
replaced by machines?
In fact, as our
research has begun to show, the story is more nuanced. While automation will
eliminate very few occupations entirely in the next decade, it will affect
portions of almost all jobs to a greater or lesser degree, depending on the
type of work they entail. Automation, now going beyond routine manufacturing
activities, has the potential, as least with regard to its technical
feasibility, to transform sectors such as healthcare and finance, which involve
a substantial share of knowledge work.
From science fiction to business fact
McKinsey’s Michael Chui explains
how automation is transforming work.
These conclusions rest
on our detailed analysis of 2,000-plus work activities for more than 800
occupations. Using data from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics and O*Net, we’ve
quantified both the amount of time spent on these activities across the economy
of the United States and the technical feasibility of automating each of them.
The full results, forthcoming in early 2017, will include several other
countries,1 but we released some initial
findings late last year and are following up now with additional interim
results.
Last year, we showed
that currently demonstrated technologies could automate 45 percent of the
activities people are paid to perform and that about 60 percent of all
occupations could see 30 percent or more of their constituent activities
automated, again with technologies available today. In this article, we examine
the technical feasibility, using currently demonstrated technologies, of
automating three groups of occupational activities: those that are highly
susceptible, less susceptible, and least susceptible to automation. Within each
category, we discuss the sectors and occupations where robots and other
machines are most—and least—likely to serve as substitutes in activities humans
currently perform. Toward the end of this article, we discuss how evolving
technologies, such as natural-language generation, could change the outlook, as
well as some implications for senior executives who lead increasingly automated
enterprises.
Understanding automation potential
In discussing
automation, we refer to the potential that a given activity could be automated
by adopting currently demonstrated technologies, that is to say, whether or not
the automation of that activity is technically feasible.2Each whole occupation is made up of multiple types of
activities, each with varying degrees of technical feasibility. Occupations in
retailing, for example, involve activities such as collecting or processing
data, interacting with customers, and setting up merchandise displays (which we
classify as physical movement in a predictable environment). Since all of these
constituent activities have a different automation potential, we arrive at an overall
estimate for the sector by examining the time workers spend on each of them
during the workweek.
Technical feasibility
is a necessary precondition for automation, but not a complete predictor that
an activity will be automated. A second factor to consider is the cost of
developing and deploying both the hardware and the software for automation. The
cost of labor and related supply-and-demand dynamics represent a third factor:
if workers are in abundant supply and significantly less expensive than automation,
this could be a decisive argument against it. A fourth factor to consider is
the benefits beyond labor substitution, including higher levels of output,
better quality, and fewer errors. These are often larger than those of reducing
labor costs. Regulatory and social-acceptance issues, such as the degree to
which machines are acceptable in any particular setting, must also be weighed.
A robot may, in theory, be able to replace some of the functions of a nurse,
for example. But for now, the prospect that this might actually happen in a
highly visible way could prove unpalatable for many patients, who expect human
contact. The potential for automation to take hold in a sector or occupation
reflects a subtle interplay between these factors and the trade-offs among
them.
Even when machines do
take over some human activities in an occupation, this does not necessarily
spell the end of the jobs in that line of work. On the contrary, their number
at times increases in occupations that have been partly automated, because
overall demand for their remaining activities has continued to grow. For
example, the large-scale deployment of bar-code scanners and associated
point-of-sale systems in the United States in the 1980s reduced labor costs per
store by an estimated 4.5 percent and the cost of the groceries consumers
bought by 1.4 percent.3 It also enabled a number of
innovations, including increased promotions. But cashiers were still needed; in
fact, their employment grew at an average rate of more than 2 percent between
1980 and 2013.
The most automatable activities
Almost one-fifth of the
time spent in US workplaces involves performing physical activities or
operating machinery in a predictable environment: workers carry out specific
actions in well-known settings where changes are relatively easy to anticipate.
Through the adaptation and adoption of currently available technologies, we
estimate the technical feasibility of automating such activities at 78 percent,
the highest of our seven top-level categories. Since predictable physical
activities figure prominently in sectors such as manufacturing, food service
and accommodations, and retailing, these are the most susceptible to automation
based on technical considerations alone.
In manufacturing, for
example, performing physical activities or operating machinery in a predictable
environment represents one-third of the workers’ overall time. The activities
range from packaging products to loading materials on production equipment to
welding to maintaining equipment. Because of the prevalence of such predictable
physical work, some 59 percent of all manufacturing activities could be
automated, given technical considerations. The overall technical feasibility,
however, masks considerable variance. Within manufacturing, 90 percent of what
welders, cutters, solderers, and brazers do, for example, has the technical
potential for automation, but for customer-service representatives that
feasibility is below 30 percent. The potential varies among companies as well.
Our work with manufacturers reveals a wide range of adoption levels—from
companies with inconsistent or little use of automation all the way to quite
sophisticated users.
Manufacturing, for all
its technical potential, is only the second most readily automatable sector in
the US economy. A service sector occupies the top spot: accommodations and food
service, where almost half of all labor time involves predictable physical
activities and the operation of machinery—including preparing, cooking, or
serving food; cleaning food-preparation areas; preparing hot and cold
beverages; and collecting dirty dishes. According to our analysis, 73 percent
of the activities workers perform in food service and accommodations have the
potential for automation, based on technical considerations.
Some of this potential
is familiar. Automats, or automated cafeterias, for example, have long been in
use. Now restaurants are testing new, more sophisticated concepts, like
self-service ordering or even robotic servers. Solutions such as Momentum
Machines’ hamburger-cooking robot, which can reportedly assemble and cook 360
burgers an hour, could automate a number of cooking and food-preparation activities.
But while the technical potential for automating them might be high, the
business case must take into account both the benefits and the costs of
automation, as well as the labor-supply dynamics discussed earlier. For some of
these activities, current wage rates are among the lowest in the United States,
reflecting both the skills required and the size of the available labor supply.
Since restaurant employees who cook earn an average of about $10 an hour, a
business case based solely on reducing labor costs may be unconvincing.
Retailing is another
sector with a high technical potential for automation. We estimate that 53
percent of its activities are automatable, though, as in manufacturing, much
depends on the specific occupation within the sector. Retailers can take
advantage of efficient, technology-driven stock management and logistics, for
example. Packaging objects for shipping and stocking merchandise are among the
most frequent physical activities in retailing, and they have a high technical
potential for automation. So do maintaining records of sales, gathering
customer or product information, and other data-collection activities. But
retailing also requires cognitive and social skills. Advising customers which
cuts of meat or what color shoes to buy requires judgment and emotional
intelligence. We calculate that 47 percent of a retail salesperson’s activities
have the technical potential to be automated—far less than the 86 percent
possible for the sector’s bookkeepers, accountants, and auditing clerks.
As we noted above,
however, just because an activity can be automated doesn’t mean that it will
be—broader economic factors are at play. The jobs of bookkeepers, accountants,
and auditing clerks, for example, require skills and training, so they are
scarcer than basic cooks. But the activities they perform cost less to
automate, requiring mostly software and a basic computer.
Considerations such as
these have led to an observed tendency for higher rates of automation for
activities common in some middle-skill jobs—for example, in data collection and
data processing. As automation advances in capability, jobs involving higher
skills will probably be automated at increasingly high rates.
CONTINUES IN PART II
No comments:
Post a Comment