Technology based systems typically do not produce cost benefits immediately, due to the high level of expenditure for equipment, capital, training and other start-up activities. Given the rate of change in technologies, and potential trends towards decreasing costs for many automated solutions, picking the right time to acquire technology is also important for cost-effectiveness. Careful consideration needs to be given to future costs of maintaining automated solutions, in terms of equipment or software maintenance, training, upgrades, licence fees and the like. The lower initial costs of contracting out on a fee basis may be attractive, but there may be disadvantages. Given the specialised nature of many voting operations automated systems, this may also leave it unable to escape substantial cost increases for subsequent contracts.
Careful consideration needs to be given to cost versus control and reliability issues.
This is not a question just limited to alternative uses within the election budget. Funds used for elections in general are not available for other social expenditure. Most importantly, the introduction of new technology will have not only financial costs but social costs as well. Automated systems for, say, pre-packaging of voting site materials may, on balance, be more effective, or even less costly. Where their introduction will lead to loss of casual election work opportunities, even for such short periods, and particularly in areas of high unemployment, the effect on local communities needs to be considered.