Introduction: The Manual vs Automation Dilemma

If you work in tech, operations, or anywhere efficiency is king, you know the magnetic pull of automation. We’re told it’s the ultimate productivity hack—build a workflow, write some code, plug in an AI tool, and suddenly all those tedious tasks vanish into the background.

But here’s the unvarnished truth: sometimes, the so-called “terrible” manual way is actually the sharpest move in the room. Underneath all the hype about streamlining and scaling, we rarely talk about when it’s actually better to roll up your sleeves and just do the work by hand.

Let me explain. There’s this old idea called the ‘Law of Instrument’—or Maslow’s Hammer—which basically says that if you have a shiny new tool, every problem starts to look like a nail. And with automation at our fingertips, it’s easy—almost automatic—to fall into that trap. But knowing when to step back and ask yourself, “Is this really worth automating?”—that’s where the real skill comes in.

Why does this happen so often? And how do you actually know when to stop automating and just get things done? Let me take you through a story that brought this dilemma home for me.

A Real-Life Frustration: Building a LinkedIn Content Database

So I faced two options:

1. Spend hours (or days) building a custom script that could break the next time LinkedIn changed its UI.
2. Bite the bullet and manually copy-paste each post into a CSV file—the exact kind of work I avoid at all costs.

On paper, scripting felt clever—a smart investment in future efficiency. But if I’m being honest? It was classic avoidance: tinkering with tools instead of actually solving the problem. I’ve given this advice to others more times than I can count, but resisting it myself was another story.

If this sounds familiar, you’re not alone. Procurement and finance professionals spend nearly a third (31%) of their time mired in inefficient manual processes—costing businesses an average of £1.94m ($2.6m) each year (research on cost of manual processes). Sometimes manual work is both a necessary evil and an unexpected resource drain.

And it isn’t just business types wrestling with this—many academic researchers still organize and code qualitative data by hand even though there are sophisticated software tools available. They’ve found that manual methods can lead to deeper insights and more flexible analysis. Sometimes, rolling up your sleeves really does pay off.

The Productivity Trap: When Automation Becomes Procrastination

Here’s where things get sticky: the urge to automate can easily turn into what’s sometimes called “productivity theater.” You’re busy writing scripts, configuring apps, designing clever flows—but you’re not actually moving closer to your real goal.

I see this all the time—in myself and in teams I coach. It feels productive, but really it’s just another form of procrastination dressed up as progress. Organizations fall into this trap too: endless debates over which tool to use or months spent selecting software while actual work stalls out.

Why? Because automation scratches our itch for perfection and control. We imagine some utopia where everything runs like clockwork if we just get the system right this time. But chasing that ideal can lead us off track—not every problem deserves a permanent solution or a custom tool. Sometimes you need to get your hands dirty and move on.

Software engineers even have a name for it: “premature optimization”—pouring energy into refining something before you really know what you need. Too often, it leads straight to wasted effort and unnecessary delays.

A real example from business ops: a team decides to automate their invoice processing system. Sounds smart! But then comes the requirements gathering, endless debates about integrations, testing cycles—it drags on for months before anyone sees real value. Meanwhile, invoices keep piling up and people still process them manually on the side. What started as a time-saving project turns into a time sink.

This focus on appearing busy rather than making real progress is sometimes described as productivity theater, where activity gets mistaken for achievement—and it’s more common than most teams realize.

Manual Wins: Why Simplicity Can Trump Automation

You might assume any repetitive task is worth automating—but reality isn’t so black-and-white. There are plenty of moments where manual work is simply smarter:

• One-off or Infrequent Tasks: If you’ll only do something once (or very rarely), spending hours automating rarely pays off. My LinkedIn export? A single bulk job I won’t need again anytime soon.
• Unpredictable or Messy Data: Automation loves consistency. But when your source material is full of quirks (like social media exports or legacy files), it’s usually faster—and less risky—to go manual.
• Speed to Completion: Sometimes you need results now. Building or debugging an automated workflow might take longer than just grinding through the task yourself.
• Resource Constraints: Not everyone has access to fancy tools—or time to learn them on the fly. Manual work levels the playing field.

Manual methods have hidden perks too: you catch errors as they happen, you get intimate with your data or process, and sometimes new insights pop up simply from being hands-on.

Small business owners know this dance well—when every minute counts and budgets are tight, they often stick with manual bookkeeping or customer follow-ups rather than splurging on tools that require heavy setup and ongoing care. These aren’t decisions made out of fear or stubbornness—they’re pragmatic choices rooted in what actually delivers results right now.

Even in high-performing environments, it’s important to balance efficiency with effectiveness—a concept explored further in balancing efficiency and effectiveness in goal setting. Sometimes the simplest path forward creates more momentum than any sophisticated system ever could.

A Framework for Deciding: Manual vs Automation

So how do you know which road to take? Here’s a framework I’ve honed after more than a few hours lost to automating things that didn’t need it:

A decision-making framework is really just a structured way to walk yourself (or your team) through what matters most: priorities, gathering information, weighing options, assessing risks/rewards, and making an informed call (overview of decision-making frameworks).

• Frequency: Will this task show up often enough to justify building an automated solution?
  • If yes (think daily or weekly): Lean toward automation.
  • If not (once/rarely): Manual almost always wins on speed and effort.
• Complexity and Consistency: Is this task straightforward enough for automation to actually work?
  • If it’s highly variable or unpredictable: Stick with manual.
  • If it’s structured and repeatable: Automation could shine.
• Time Investment: How long will setup take compared to just doing it by hand?
  • If automation setup takes much longer than doing the task manually—and there’s no recurring need—manual is your best friend.
• Opportunity Cost: What else could you be doing with your precious time?
  • Don’t automate just for the sake of it if there are higher priorities on your plate.
• Risk and Reversibility: Can you easily fix mistakes if something goes wrong?
  • For high-risk or critical tasks, start with manual oversight until you trust the process.
  • For low-risk or reversible jobs, automation experiments are safer.

There isn’t one right answer for every situation—it depends on task type, industry needs, available resources, business goals. The trick is staying honest about what really matters for each scenario (balancing manual vs automated methods).

Example:
Suppose your team needs to send out a one-time personalized email blast to 50 clients—with unique notes for each person. You could spend hours building a mail merge system…or just tackle it with copy-paste in Gmail, saving time and avoiding headaches from potential script errors.

And don’t skip this step—revisit your decision framework regularly so you don’t get stuck in old habits as your needs change over time. Stay flexible; let your approach evolve as your business evolves.

If you ever feel stuck weighing these options or find yourself overcomplicating simple tasks, consider using a 3-step reset for productivity—sometimes stepping back helps reveal the most direct route forward.

Conclusion: Get It Done—The Value of Pragmatism

Here’s my closing nudge: next time you face a task that seems perfect for automation, pause and ask yourself—what am I really trying to achieve here? If speed, accuracy, or simplicity matter most—and if automation might bog things down—don’t be afraid to pick the so-called “terrible” way.

Effectiveness isn’t always about elegance or perfect efficiency; sometimes it’s about getting across the finish line however you can. Give yourself permission to solve problems simply when that’s what serves you best.

There’s no shame in rolling up your sleeves if it gets you closer to your goal today. In fact, sometimes it’s the sharpest move you can make all week.

Effectiveness isn’t always about elegance or perfect efficiency; sometimes it’s about getting across the finish line however you can. Give yourself permission to solve problems simply when that’s what serves you best.

In the manual vs automation debate, pragmatism wins every time.

Choosing pragmatic solutions doesn’t mean turning your back on innovation; it means matching your effort to reality—being present enough to know when cutting-edge tools fit the job and when classic hands-on work delivers more impact.

Ultimately, it isn’t about picking sides but tuning in to what truly serves your goals right now. By valuing both smart automation and focused manual effort, you build flexibility—and that’s what lets you adapt and succeed as the world keeps changing.

If you want to explore practical ways to boost your effectiveness regardless of method, check out how to maximize productivity—anywhere you work. Sometimes it’s about working smarter, not just faster.