What makes work automatable
Three conditions that determine whether a step belongs in a system or with a human.
Condition 1
The trigger is definable as a rule
Something specific and consistent causes this step to happen. A record reaching a certain stage. A date passing. A form being submitted. If the condition for action requires someone to read a situation and decide, 'this feels like the right moment', the trigger is not automatable yet. The judgment lives in the trigger, not just the action.
Condition 2
The output is consistent enough to template
Every instance of this step produces something structurally the same. A message in the same format. A record updated the same way. A notification sent to the same channel. If every instance requires a different response because the context is different, the output requires human judgment. If the variation is just in the data filled into a template, the output can be automated.
Condition 3
The data to drive it actually exists in a system
Automation cannot synthesise context that lives in someone's memory or inbox. If the trigger and the template both depend on information that is not captured in a system, a commitment made in a meeting, a relationship nuance that only one person knows, the automation will either misfire or require the same human involvement to set up correctly each time. The data problem comes before the automation problem.
What cannot be automated
Work that requires context, judgment or relationship.
Reading a situation and deciding what is appropriate. Maintaining trust in a relationship where the person matters, not just the outcome. Handling exceptions that do not fit any predefined rule. Making a decision where the wrong answer has consequences. Providing accountability for an outcome. None of these belong in an automated system. They belong with a person who has the context and responsibility to get them right.
