The Doorman Fallacy: When Efficiency Kills Value

Imagine a five-star hotel. A management consultant walks into the lobby, spots the doorman standing at the entrance, and immediately pulls out a spreadsheet.

"This employee is costing you $50,000 a year," the consultant argues. "Since his primary function is simply to open a door, we can replace him with a sleek, automatic sliding mechanism for a one-time cost of $5,000. You will save $45,000 in the first year alone."

On paper, the math is irrefutable. So, the hotel fires the doorman. The spreadsheet turns green, the consultant collects a hefty bonus, and everyone pats themselves on the back for being data-driven.

Two years later, however, the hotel’s reputation has tanked. Why? Because the consultant defined the doorman’s job far too narrowly. He wasn't just opening a physical door; he was the first human touchpoint of the entire brand.

He was signaling status, because a human greeter implies a level of luxury and care that a machine cannot replicate. He was providing security, as his mere presence deterred vagrants. He was handling logistics, hailing taxis and managing luggage for tired travelers. Most importantly, he was recognizing guests. A warm "Welcome back, Mr. Pathak" creates a depth of loyalty that an automatic door—no matter how fast or silent—will never achieve.

The hotel made the classic mistake of optimizing for the one metric they could measure (the cost of opening a door) while destroying all the invisible value they couldn't.

This is the Doorman Fallacy. It is the dangerous belief that just because a function can be automated, it should be. It confuses "efficiency"—doing things right—with "effectiveness"—doing the right things.

The SaaS Version of the Automatic Door

In the software world, we commit this fallacy constantly. We analyze processes that involve humans—like onboarding, support, or sales—and obsess over a single question: "How can we automate this to zero marginal cost?"

In doing so, we optimize for the spreadsheet rather than the customer.

Support: The Chatbot Trap

We tend to minimize customer support to the simple act of "answering tickets." This reductionist view leads us to swap out support agents for AI chatbots that can deflect 60% of queries. While this is undeniably efficient, it sacrifices the empathy and trust-building that happens when a human steps in to solve a problem during a crisis.

When a customer is angry or confused, they are in a state of high emotional arousal. An automated response, regardless of its accuracy, often feels like a dismissal. A human response, on the other hand, feels like validation. You might be able to automate the answer, but you simply cannot automate the care.

Sales: The Self-Serve Illusion

Similarly, we often view sales as merely "getting a signature." We replace expensive sales engineers with self-serve checkouts to save on commissions. But in the process, we lose the ability to navigate complex internal politics or tailor a pitch to a specific stakeholder's needs.

The "doorman" in sales isn't just taking an order; he is reading the room. He notices when a CFO looks skeptical and pivots the pitch to focus on ROI. He builds the kind of relationship capital that saves a deal when the product inevitably hits a bug three months later. An automatic checkout page has no such intuition.

Onboarding: The Generic Drip

We also mistake onboarding for "teaching features," leading us to replace a dedicated Customer Success Manager with a generic email drip campaign. We save time, but we miss the critical opportunity to understand a user's specific goals and lock them in emotionally.

A Customer Success Manager acts as an accountability partner and a strategist, not just a tutorial. When they say, "I've seen other clients struggle with this, and here is how they fixed it," they are transferring hard-earned wisdom, not just technical information.

When Should You Keep the Doorman?

Rory Sutherland argues that we need to stop obsessing over "shareholder value" (efficiency) and start focusing on "customer value" (effectiveness). Paradoxically, the most inefficient part of your business is often the most valuable.

You should keep the "doorman" when:

1. Trust is a Requirement If a decision is high-stakes or the user is anxious, a human presence dramatically reduces fear. An automatic door provides access, but a doorman provides reassurance. In industries like fintech or healthcare, the "inefficiency" of a human support agent is actually a core feature, signaling that a safety net exists.

2. Complexity is High Automation thrives on linear paths, but humans excel at edge cases. If your product is complex, a human guide is a necessity, not a luxury. If your implementation requires navigating a maze of legacy systems, you need a Sherpa, not a map.

3. Status Matters If you are selling a premium enterprise tool, forcing high-value leads through a generic automated funnel signals that you undervalue their time. If a client is paying $100k a year, they expect a human to pick up the phone. The sheer presence of that human is part of the value proposition.

Conclusion

The next time you are tempted to automate a process, pause and look away from the spreadsheet for a moment.

Ask yourself: Am I replacing a door opener, or am I firing a doorman?

Are you merely removing a repetitive task, or are you unwittingly deleting a source of intangible value? The spreadsheet won't tell you the difference, but your customers definitely will—usually by walking through someone else's door.