Doorman fallacy: Difference between revisions
m 23 revisions imported: Import with full history |
No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The '''doorman fallacy''' is a [[Category mistake|category error]] in which a complex human role is reduced to a function, leading to the assumption that it can be replaced with a cost-effective automated substitute without loss of value, with decision-makers failing to understand the indirect, intangible, non-visible value they provide.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Lipnickas |first1=Gediminas |date=3 November 2025 |title=The ‘doorman fallacy’: why careless adoption of AI backfires so easily |url=https://theconversation.com/the-doorman-fallacy-why-careless-adoption-of-ai-backfires-so-easily-268380 |access-date=20 June 2026 |work=The Conversation}}</ref> | The '''doorman fallacy''' is a [[Category mistake|category error]] in which a complex human role is reduced to a function, leading to the assumption that it can be replaced with a cost-effective automated substitute without loss of value, with decision-makers failing to understand the indirect, intangible, non-visible value they provide.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Lipnickas |first1=Gediminas |date=3 November 2025 |title=The ‘doorman fallacy’: why careless adoption of AI backfires so easily |url=https://theconversation.com/the-doorman-fallacy-why-careless-adoption-of-ai-backfires-so-easily-268380 |access-date=20 June 2026 |work=The Conversation}}</ref> | ||
Latest revision as of 18:43, 29 September 2026
The doorman fallacy is a category error in which a complex human role is reduced to a function, leading to the assumption that it can be replaced with a cost-effective automated substitute without loss of value, with decision-makers failing to understand the indirect, intangible, non-visible value they provide.[1]
The concept is closely related to ideas in behavioral economics and signaling theory, particularly the distinction between observable tasks and latent value creation.[2]
Origin
The term "doorman fallacy" was coined and popularized by Rory Sutherland in his 2019 book Alchemy: The Surprising Power of Ideas That Don’t Make Sense.[3]
The term "doorman" refers to the role of a hotel doorman, which is mistakenly assumed to be solely for opening doors. The hotel replaces the doorman with an automated door system as a cost-saving measure. However, they fail to realize the indirect functions such as the following:
- Guest recognition and assistance
- Providing security and surveillance
- Status signaling and brand perception
Sutherland argues that such roles often create less visible value that exceeds their direct cost, meaning removal can reduce long-term profitability despite lowering operational expenditure.[3][4]
Use in AI
Recent discussions have extended the concept of the doorman fallacy to generative AI's replacement of white-collar and customer service roles.[5]
In 2025, the Commonwealth Bank of Australia laid 45 customer service staff off, replacing them with an automated AI voice bot. The bank reversed its decision amid pressure from a workers' union, admitting it "did not adequately consider all relevant business considerations and this error meant the roles were not redundant".[6][5] Robert M. Wachter, Chair in Hospital Medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, described the idea that AI could replace doctors an example of the fallacy.[7]
See also
References
- ↑ Lipnickas, Gediminas (3 November 2025). "The ‘doorman fallacy’: why careless adoption of AI backfires so easily". The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/the-doorman-fallacy-why-careless-adoption-of-ai-backfires-so-easily-268380.
- ↑ "The Doorman. The Magic Starts Here. Charles Leon" (in en-US). 2019-07-21. https://www.charlesleon.uk/blog/the-doorman-where-the-magic-starts.
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 Sutherland, Rory (2019). Alchemy : the surprising power of ideas that don't make sense. London. ISBN 978-0-7535-5137-0. OCLC 1091689287.
- ↑ "Rory Sutherland's doorman fallacy" (in en-GB). https://www.mfpwealthmanagement.co.uk/blog/doorman-fallacy-rory-sutherland.
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 Lipnickas, Gediminas (3 November 2025). "The ‘doorman fallacy’: why careless adoption of AI backfires so easily". https://theconversation.com/the-doorman-fallacy-why-careless-adoption-of-ai-backfires-so-easily-268380. Retrieved on 2026-09-25.
- ↑ Subin, Samantha (2025-10-22). "AI is already taking white-collar jobs. Economists warn there's 'much more in the tank'" (in en). https://www.cnbc.com/2025/10/22/ai-taking-white-collar-jobs-economists-warn-much-more-in-the-tank.html.
- ↑ Landymore, Frank (4 September 2026). "American Medical Association Fires Back Against Paper Finding AI Is Now Outperforming Doctors". https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/american-medical-association-fires-back-ai-doctors. Retrieved on 2026-09-25.