Defaults matter
I recently read a couple of articles that suggested “automatic” 401K and IRA signups and a “sensible default portfolio” as a way to increase the low savings rate in the U.S., and it reminded me of an impressive feature of the Rails web application framework, which is essentially that of “smart defaults.” This is touted as a core principle in Rails, “convention over configuration,” and means that fewer lines of code are needed to write a typical web application, since many apps are similar in many ways.
It seems to me that defaults are almost always an important meta-object, and are often overlooked. In both cases above, the designers of a system can help everyone do “the right thing” by incorporating sensible defaults instead of blanks that need to be filled in to even get started. So workers could by default be building a diversified portfolio in tax-deferred accounts; those with an interest in such things could override these defaults, but an action would be required not to save. Similarly, a programmer using Rails can take advantage of default naming schemes and database structures, limiting external configuration metadata to aspects of the application that do not fit with these defaults. One can argue about what the “right thing” is for defaults to do, but they should do something, otherwise the system becomes inherently limited to those who have the time and expertise to get into all the gory details. And few people have the time to become expert consumers in all these areas.
With regard to public policy, this issue takes on a particular cast in the U.S., where a big emphasis is put on freedom of action and each person having the right and responsibility to do things their own way with minimal government interference. The problem is that increasingly, basic aspects of life like health, job training, and funding retirement years are complex areas with an endless array of options. If there is no public policy that shapes coherent defaults in these areas, experience shows that many people end up with the “default defaults,” like no health care unless covered by an employer, no training for likely future job requirements, and no tax-deferred retirement savings accounts. Democratically determined smart defaults that are always easily overridable seem to me like a good balance between the extremes of the “nanny state” and the winner-takes-all jungle.
September 22nd, 2006 at 10:04 am
[…] But at least for me, that doesn’t at all mean that we should throw up our hands and sign our names on every page we visit. You can do a lot to remain anonymous on the internet, and as always, defaults matter. It’s true, if someone really wants to track you down, and is willing to dedicate time and money to doing so, there’s a decent chance they’ll succeed. But the same is true in the real world: if someone really wants to break into your house, they probably can. But that doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t lock your doors and safeguard the key. Most crimes are crimes of opportunity, and basic good habits will make a big difference in how likely you are to have problems. […]