Engineering:Doorman fallacy
This template is being used in the wrong namespace. To nominate this talk page for deletion, go to Miscellany for deletion.
This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. Please share your thoughts on the matter at this article's entry on the Articles for deletion page. |
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 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 2026-09-25.
 |  |
