- The structure of workflows is meant to minimize the margin of error, but it is impossible to anticipate every possible outcome. So, when unexpected challenges occur, it is difficult to adapt the workflow to the situation.
- Given the sequential interdependence structure of the workflow, decisions made upstream have a direct effect on those downstream. For example, if someone upstream drops out, then everything after has to be put on hold until they are replaced.
- Also, the relative lack of concurrent communication in workflows makes it more likely that someone upstream would make a design decision incompatible with the process downstream, disrupting the operation.
- In contrast, the concurrent work structure in role-based teams made it easier to respond to mistakes and emergencies as they occurred.


Workflows Make it Difficult to Respond to Contingencies

- In complex work, being able to dynamically adapt when the work plan or structure is no longer the best-suited for the current context is key.	
- However, the strict constraints embedded into workflows prevent workers from successfully implementing alternate solutions, even when better options are identified.
- Also, because workflows are constructed so that people can individually complete each step on their own, crowd workers are encouraged to think myopically about their own responsibilities rather than globally about the final product.
- In contrast, role-based teams could adapt flexibly to their current situation and communicate with one another to collectively implement better solutions.


Workflows Prevent Workers from Pivoting

The strict pre-arranged structure of workflows inhibit the crowd’s ability to:
- Respond to contingencies
- Consider and implement alternative solutions

New York University

- Complex tasks require situated action: constant reflection, revision, and adaptation toward one’s goals. The more complex the task, the more necessary adaptation becomes.
- Workflows streamline the work process, reducing the margin of error. 
- However, workflows are static, limiting situated action. As such, complex tasks have traditionally been difficult to achieve using workflows.  

Tradeoffs of Using Workflows to Complete Complex Tasks

Retelny, D., Bernstein, M. S., & Valentine, M. A. (2017). No workflow can ever be enough: How crowdsourcing workflows constrain complex work. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 1(CSCW), 1-23.

No Workflow Can Ever Be Enough: How Crowdsourcing Workflows Constrain Complex Work

- Workflows are limited tools in unpredictable situations with evolving goals that require open-ended adaptation, making them problematic for complex work
- However, as the results show, the structure that workflows enforce are still important. Future designs must find a balance between structure and flexibility.
- The researchers suggest a few possible ways to improve future designs for crowdsourcing platforms that would incorporate their findings, as well as ways to improve existing platforms.


Implications for Future Design (How Crowdsourcing Workflows Constrain Complex Work)

Workflows as an Obstacle to Adaptation

Workflows support coordination in three main ways:
- Encoding the best practices
- Influencing interdependence styles
- Minimizing coordination challenges


Learn Before

Related

Learn After