Comments on: Talking about Paper

By: Robert Kirkpatrick

Robert Kirkpatrick — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 02:17:46 +0000

Paul,

Thanks for the warm welcome and thoughtful comments!

My optimistic prediction about the day when we have a paperless field is indeed wishful thinking. I hope I do live to see that day. But my prediction was in no way intended to suggest that we are anywhere close to it being ready to leave paper behind. Talking Papers, if it performs as described, will be a clear affirmation that paper has many years, if not decades, of service yet to render to the humanitarian relief and development communities. Given the natural advantages that paper has over digital formats, I donâ€™t believe weâ€™ll see a truly viable successor until we have a cheap, flexible, easy to reproduce â€œdigital paperâ€

By: “If it’s not on the slide…” at humanitarian.info

“If it’s not on the slide…” at humanitarian.info — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:02:02 +0000

[...] that new technology isn’t necessarily an improvement on old technology – as per my post on paper. Pick the right technology for the task in hand, and always be questioning our use of technology to [...]

By: Mikel Maron

Mikel Maron — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 15:18:06 +0000

Great critique. I actually think Robert is too soft on the tech solutions .. we’re discovering that paper is actual a better solution in many cases .. witness Walking Papers which was part of the inspiration for the Talking Papers effort.

As you emphasize, transparency is another weak point in this flow, and I’d put forward that it would contribute towards better use of information in decision making due to the increasing ease of accountability. Talking Papers should emphasize transparency and openness in its design as well.

By: Paul Currion

Paul Currion — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 16:41:03 +0000

Thanks Patrick, and thanks for the link. No project that seeks to improve data collection is a complete waste of time, but I’m not sure that data entry is the weak link in the chain. I’m not even sure that timeliness is the weak link in the chain either – there’s still debate to be had about the advantages and disadvantages of real-time monitoring.

By: Patrick

Patrick — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 02:44:21 +0000

Thanks for this, Paul. I’ve been meaning to reply to Robert’s post myself as I think it should be generating more conversation in the blogosphere. In any case, I largely agree with your feedback.

While indirectly related, I thought I’d share this project which seeks to minimize error in data entry using mobile phones:

http://irevolution.wordpress.com/2009/04/22/improving-quality-of-data-collected-by-mobile-phones

I write “indirect” because most of the points you raise still apply to mobile phones. So the latter is no panacea but the project is still interesting and could have a positive impact in some cases.