As I heard from a wise old pilot, 'the problem with automation and computers is getting the old guys to trust it , and the young guys not to trust it'.
Here in Oz, with our computerised TAAATS system, it seems to work pretty well. We have grown used to it after ten plus years and alot of upgrades to make it more user friendly. However it is only as good as the programs put into it. e.g a seemingly innocuous click from someone upstream can have repercussions downstream for the automatic co-ordination.
Many of our functions can be done either through the electronic strip or by interacting with the track/label on the screen, so you don't have to take your eyes away from the screen.
Those who have been on the system for years have evolved that unconscious competence that a glance at the electronic strip triggers something isn't quite right with the data displayed.
It is something you get used to. One of the problems with system alerting is spurious alarms. e.g. you have received a clearance for an aircraft to enter a Danger Area but the system will still have kittens if you have not turned the alarm off, which you maybe loathe to do as you need to remember to turn it on for controllers downstream. This also affects the alarms for Wx Div, STCA (Short Term Conflict Alert) when traffic has already been given, etc.
On the whole an electronic strip/ computerised system has been a big plus in the colony.
A word of warning though this may happen ( and I'm not saying this is my experience in Oz), management will be told by the sales people SELLING these systems that they will cost thrupence hapenny, can be safely run by two people and a tech, and run on the smell of an oily rag/ AAA battery. Management will be all agog at where they will spend the huge bonus coming their way when the system comes on line.
As the system evolves they will work out that it will end up costing many times what they were led to believe and a hell of a lot more to run/ upgrade as problems are encountered and 'consultants' are engaged. Some of the consultants may be the ex-managers who signed up for the system in the first place as they are now working for the company who sold them the system.
Realising that the only item they still have some control over , and not believing that the company selling the system may have gilded the lily somewhat to close the sale, the big push will be for a reduction in staff numbers, there may be also be a big push to dumb down the training as management may believe that people are now just helping the computer to do its job.
It is a constant cause of wonder to me that managers or organisations buy a computer system for a specific business, be it for rostering/ business reporting/ accounts/ travel buying/ etc, from a salesperson and then are shocked to discover that it is not completely suitable for their unique organisation, and that money needs to be sent to tailor it to their specific needs. The companies selling these products are not doing it out of the goodness of their hearts.
Most importantly refer to my comment at the top.