Anything that moves

Getting Watsoned: Why robots could spell disaster for India's IT sector

Robotic process automation could drastically reduce employment in the software services sector, closing one door to prosperity for middle-class Indians.

Last week, 20 years after a computer named Deep Blue defeated the then world chess champion Garry Kasparov, a machine called AlphaGo beat Lee Sedol, the best player of Go, a game more complex than chess and popular mainly in East Asia. While that massive blow was being struck for artificial intelligence, I was attempting to get humans employed by the most respected private sector bank in India to answer a simple question about my credit card. They seemed to be trying, but were restricted either by company policy or personal limitations. I got emails from Uvaraj, Padma, Melkis, Sathish, and Gayathri, but without exception they provided cookie-cutter responses culled from some list of FAQs rather than tackling the specific issue I had raised.

If a machine could beat the best human players of Go, I thought, surely one could be designed to answer my queries better than my bank’s customer-service department. As it happens, such a machine already exists, and its name is Watson. Created by IBM as the next challenge to their artificial intelligence initiative following their world-conquering chess programme, Watson is a computer system designed to answer questions posed in colloquial language. It made a splash five years ago by beating previous winners of the popular quiz show Jeopardy, and has already found commercial application in sectors like healthcare, financial services, legal research and telecommunications. As Watson gets more powerful and less expensive, I can see it replacing the likes of Uvaraj, Padma, Melkis, Sathish and Gayathri.

Robotic process automation is already a buzzword in industries around the world. It presents a massive challenge to India’s software services sector, alongside the shift to cloud based services and away from individual data centres maintained by firms’ IT department augmented by outsourced manpower. Indian software firms understand very well a revolution is underway. Wipro has spoken of trimming its workforce by 30%. Infosys hired as its Managing Director Vishal Sikka, who has a Ph.D in artificial intelligence from Stanford. The perspective of privately owned corporations, though, is exclusively geared towards increasing profits. Shifting focus from a staff augmentation model to a less labour intensive one is a technical challenge for them, but not a moral one. That’s the way it should be, for no company can retain staff as it slides into bankruptcy.

Social disruption

Framers of public policy, however, must look at the issue from the perspective of human employment. A drop in the number of professionals working in the software services sector would be severely disruptive to the nation’s social fabric, and I don’t use the word disruptive in the positive sense it has gained in the tech world. If call centres becomes obsolete, if the BPO business is decimated, and if a range of rote jobs across the service sector fall prey to automation, as is more than likely to happen over the next decade, it will cut off what has been for the past two decades the most important pathway to affluence for educated middle-class Indians.

It was inevitable that automation would at some point push India’s software exports sector towards greater productivity. The industry has grown from its infancy exclusively by adding workers to increase earnings. The revenue firms make for each person employed has remained virtually static for years, and is abysmally low, at well below $50,000 per year per employee.

Indians were among the first people to feel the deleterious effects of technological progress, when the textile sector was mechanised two centuries ago. We were spared the disruption caused by the mechanisation of agriculture, depicted most movingly in John Steinbeck’s novel about the dust bowl, The Grapes of Wrath. We avoided the worst effects of improved efficiency in industries such as steel, efficiency which created the rust belt in the United States. We avoided it mainly because Indian companies are forced to keep on their payroll staff they no longer need. JSW Steel manufactures more or less the same amount of metal as the Steel Authority of India, but has a workforce only one-eighth the size of SAIL’s and a labour cost per tonne of steel one-sixth that of the public sector behemoth.

Blundering on

The technological revolution in telecommunications and the Web of the first decade of the twentieth century helped India even as it hurt workers in affluent nations by opening up the potential of offshoring. The current revolution is likely to be less benevolent. Many of the jobs that were Bangalored in the past decade-and-a-half will now be Watsoned. And no government regulation can prevent the haemorrhage.

Oblivious to these monumental changes, engineering schools have proliferated around the country, to the point that we now produce hundreds of thousands of mostly mediocre graduates each year. Even though the central regulator clamped down recently, we have a massive oversupply of engineers possessing only rudimentary skills. With software service providers needing to climb the value chain, there are going to be fewer opportunities for everybody but the very best grads.

India’s ITES industry employs between 3 million and 4 million people directly, which might seem like a drop in the bucket in a nation of over a billion. But consider that some 94% of India’s workforce is employed in the unorganised sector and that the government accounts for the majority of jobs in the organised sector. ITES provides one in every four jobs within the privately owned, organised sphere, which is a massive chunk, commensurate with its disproportionate contribution to the nation’s exports and GDP. Should employment in this sector fall, it will be like being shaken awake from a wonderful dream.

Recognising the danger

I’m not sure the government is adequately cognisant of the threat. Among its signature initiatives is "Skill India", which appears laudable in theory but is confused in practice. KPMG was tasked with projecting the future of employment opportunities in India. Its report on the software sector forecast an increase of 2 million jobs over the next seven years. This is an inordinately sanguine outlook, not shared by any expert I’ve read on the subject. When every major firm is speaking about cutting flab and projecting workforce reductions up to 30%, when many smaller companies seem unlikely to cope with the tremendous technical churn underway, and when corporations across the US and Europe have mandated cuts to their IT budgets, where are those two million extra jobs going to come from? It’s like somebody doing a survey of the steel industry in 1975 and predicting a 60% increase in the workforce over the coming decade.

As an aside, a second technological revolution threatens our best paid blue-collar workers. I am speaking of the six million Indians employed in countries in West Asia wounded by plummeting oil prices. So far, Gulf nations have dipped into their cash reserves to keep investment up, but austerity is around the corner, and around the next corner is recession, should crude prices stay low for years as they probably will. I believe that 30 years from now places like Abu Dhabi will be what Detroit is today, formerly glittering centres of wealth reduced to a shadow of their former selves. Migrant workers are going to get fracked in the process even as Bangalore gets Watsoned. What happens when much of the $35 billion remitted annually by Gulf workers dries up? More generally, what if the demographic dividend of which we are so happy reverts to the nightmare of overpopulation it was in the 1970s, with millions of young men and women growing frustrated and angry at the dearth of decently paid or reasonably secure employment?

I am not suggesting that doom and gloom are assured. New technologies could open up vistas nobody can see right now, creating new spaces for graduates as well as blue-collar labourers. But we should always factor in worst-case scenarios, and I don’t see anybody in the policy establishment doing that at the moment.

We welcome your comments at
Sponsored Content  BY 

As India turns 70, London School of Economics asks some provocative questions

Is India ready to become a global superpower?

Meaningful changes have always been driven by the right, but inconvenient questions. As India completes 70 years of its sovereign journey, we could do two things – celebrate, pay our token tributes and move on, or take the time to reflect and assess if our course needs correction. The ‘India @ 70: LSE India Summit’, the annual flagship summit of the LSE (London School of Economics) South Asia Centre, is posing some fundamental but complex questions that define our future direction as a nation. Through an honest debate – built on new research, applied knowledge and ground realities – with an eclectic mix of thought leaders and industry stalwarts, this summit hopes to create a thought-provoking discourse.

From how relevant (or irrelevant) is our constitutional framework, to how we can beat the global one-upmanship games, from how sincere are business houses in their social responsibility endeavours to why water is so crucial to our very existence as a strong nation, these are some crucial questions that the event will throw up and face head-on, even as it commemorates the 70th anniversary of India’s independence.

Is it time to re-look at constitution and citizenship in India?

The Constitution of India is fundamental to the country’s identity as a democratic power. But notwithstanding its historical authority, is it perhaps time to examine its relevance? The Constitution was drafted at a time when independent India was still a young entity. So granting overwhelming powers to the government may have helped during the early years. But in the current times, they may prove to be more discriminatory than egalitarian. Our constitution borrowed laws from other countries and continues to retain them, while the origin countries have updated them since then. So, do we need a complete overhaul of the constitution? An expert panel led by Dr Mukulika Banerjee of LSE, including political and economic commentator S Gurumurthy, Madhav Khosla of Columbia University, Niraja Gopal Jayal of JNU, Chintan Chandrachud the author of the book Balanced Constitutionalism and sociologist, legal researcher and Director of Council for Social Development Kalpana Kannabiran will seek answers to this.

Is CSR simply forced philanthropy?

While India pioneered the mandatory minimum CSR spend, has it succeeded in driving impact? Corporate social responsibility has many dynamics at play. Are CSR initiatives mere tokenism for compliance? Despite government guidelines and directives, are CSR activities well-thought out initiatives, which are monitored and measured for impact? The CSR stipulations have also spawned the proliferation of ambiguous NGOs. The session, ‘Does forced philanthropy work – CSR in India?” will raise these questions of intent, ethics and integrity. It will be moderated by Professor Harry Barkema and have industry veterans such as Mukund Rajan (Chairman, Tata Council for Community Initiatives), Onkar S Kanwar (Chairman and CEO, Apollo Tyres), Anu Aga (former Chairman, Thermax) and Rahul Bajaj (Chairman, Bajaj Group) on the panel.

Can India punch above its weight to be considered on par with other super-powers?

At 70, can India mobilize its strengths and galvanize into the role of a serious power player on the global stage? The question is related to the whole new perception of India as a dominant power in South Asia rather than as a Third World country, enabled by our foreign policies, defense strategies and a buoyant economy. The country’s status abroad is key in its emergence as a heavyweight but the foreign service officers’ cadre no longer draws top talent. Is India equipped right for its aspirations? The ‘India Abroad: From Third World to Regional Power’ panel will explore India’s foreign policy with Ashley Tellis, Meera Shankar (Former Foreign Secretary), Kanwal Sibal (Former Foreign Secretary), Jayant Prasad and Rakesh Sood.

Are we under-estimating how critical water is in India’s race ahead?

At no other time has water as a natural resource assumed such a big significance. Studies estimate that by 2025 the country will become ‘water–stressed’. While water has been the bone of contention between states and controlling access to water, a source for political power, has water security received the due attention in economic policies and development plans? Relevant to the central issue of water security is also the issue of ‘virtual water’. Virtual water corresponds to the water content (used) in goods and services, bulk of which is in food grains. Through food grain exports, India is a large virtual net exporter of water. In 2014-15, just through export of rice, India exported 10 trillion litres of virtual water. With India’s water security looking grim, are we making the right economic choices? Acclaimed author and academic from the Institute of Economic Growth, Delhi, Amita Bavisar will moderate the session ‘Does India need virtual water?’

Delve into this rich confluence of ideas and more at the ‘India @ 70: LSE India Summit’, presented by Apollo Tyres in association with the British Council and organized by Teamworks Arts during March 29-31, 2017 at the India Habitat Centre, New Delhi. To catch ‘India @ 70’ live online, register here.

At the venue, you could also visit the Partition Museum. Dedicated to the memory of one of the most conflict-ridden chapters in our country’s history, the museum will exhibit a unique archive of rare photographs, letters, press reports and audio recordings from The Partition Museum, Amritsar.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Teamwork Arts and not by the Scroll editorial team.