Archive · 10 Nov 2025
Companies Face AI Backlash Due to the ‘Doorman Fallacy’
Imagine a hotel doorman.
They open the door, but they also greet guests warmly, help them with bags, call taxis, and make the hotel feel fancy.
A consultant might only see them opening the door and think, 'A robot can do that!'
But they miss all the other helpful things the doorman does that make people feel special.
This is like the 'doorman fallacy' with AI.
Companies sometimes only see the simple parts of a job, like answering a phone, and think AI can do it.
But they forget that people bring helpful things like understanding, problem-solving, and a friendly attitude that a machine can't easily copy.
When companies replace people with AI without thinking about these extra human qualities, things often go wrong, and customers get upset.
Some companies are even hiring people back after realizing AI wasn't the best solution for every job.
It's better to use AI to help people with simple tasks, so people can focus on the parts of the job that need a human touch.
Many companies are adopting AI with high expectations, but statistics show a low percentage have fully integrated it into regular workflows.
The 'doorman fallacy,' coined by Rory Sutherland, describes oversimplifying human roles to their most visible functions, ignoring nuanced value.
Instances like Commonwealth Bank of Australia and Taco Bell highlight the negative consequences of replacing staff with AI without full consideration.
A significant portion of companies that replaced employees with AI now admit to acting too quickly, with some rehiring staff.
Effective AI adoption requires understanding the full human value in roles and pairing AI with human judgment for tasks requiring context and personal touch.
- Who
- Companies and employees across various sectors.
- What
- The 'doorman fallacy' is leading to careless AI adoption, where the complex value of human roles is overlooked in favor of automating simple tasks, resulting in implementation failures and customer dissatisfaction.
- When
- The 'doorman fallacy' concept was coined in 2019, and its effects are becoming apparent as AI adoption accelerates.
- Where
- Globally, affecting companies and their customers.
- Why
- Companies adopt AI with the expectation of efficiency and cost reduction, but often fail to recognize the intangible and nuanced value human employees provide, leading to misguided automation.
Arguments for AI Adoption
Arguments Against Uncritical AI Adoption
Efficiency and Cost Reduction
Arguments for AI Adoption
AI promises significant efficiency gains and cost reduction by automating tasks.
Arguments Against Uncritical AI Adoption
Focusing solely on visible, automatable tasks ignores the broader, intangible value humans bring, leading to costly implementation failures and diminished customer experience.
Job Impact
Arguments for AI Adoption
AI will reshape or replace millions of jobs within the next decade.
Arguments Against Uncritical AI Adoption
Many companies are finding that replacing human staff with AI leads to customer dissatisfaction and regret, with some rehiring employees after realizing the error.
Value of Human Roles
Arguments for AI Adoption
A human role can be reduced to its simplest observable functions and automated.
Arguments Against Uncritical AI Adoption
Human roles are multifaceted, involving nuanced interactions, judgment, and intangible contributions (like enhancing prestige or security) that AI cannot easily replicate, leading to a devaluing of essential human input.
- AI Adoption Rate
- 7-13% of companies have incorporated AI into regular business workflows.
- AI Use in Business Functions
- Up to 78% of companies use AI tools in at least one business area.
- Future AI Investment
- Over 90% of companies plan to increase AI investment within three years.
- Doorman Fallacy Origin
- Coined by Rory Sutherland in his 2019 book 'Alchemy'.
- Reported AI Implementation Issues
- Up to 55% of companies that replaced employees with AI now acknowledge they moved too quickly.
- Consumer Preference
- Most consumers dislike dealing with AI in customer service and prefer businesses that don't use it.