Jason, the elevator analogy is excellent because it names the gap many organizations underestimate: the technology may work before people trust what it means for them.
The line that stood out to me is that people are not only asking whether AI works — they are asking, “What does it mean about me if it does?”
That moves the conversation from implementation to identity, trust, leadership, and work design.
The idea of the “operator in the cab” is especially strong. It reinforces that leaders and managers are not just communicating change; they are absorbing anxiety while the system earns credibility.
That is the human gap organizations have to design for.
That's a brilliant way to look at it. Pushing it a little further, with AI there are still times when the rope breaks and the elevator falls at this point. I'm not sure we've gotten to the place with AI where the entire thing is fall-proof. Or maybe it's just that the elevator installation isn't fall-proof. ...The way we use AI, or create our solutions. But even now in the 2020's, if an elevator fails or falls (which doesn't really happen much), we would jump on maintenance, poor building design, to blame.... not the creator of the elevator. And who knew those elevator operators were just the Department store culture wrapped up in a uniform. I'll be mulling this over in my brain - thanks for the article!
This is wonderful. It accurately shows the steps that must be taken to make anything that is innovated accepted by the public.
Having grown up during the end of the elevator operator era, they did perform one other function. The elevator would not always stop exactly level with the floor. The operator had a hand lever which allowed for the close stop to become an exact stop. Then the lever disappeared and the operator would just punch the button for the people. Once the people saw that that the elevator would stop without adjustment the attendant quietly went away.
People knew who had the newest equipment by seeing if there was an attendant with a lever, an attendant with buttons, or no attendant.
Business still needs to take this approach when rolling out anything new. Unfortunately, I see way too often the training and support of a new technology the first thing to be cut. Then management wonders why the technology did not deliver. It is not the technology that is bad, but the roll out was doomed from the beginning.
Jason, the elevator analogy is excellent because it names the gap many organizations underestimate: the technology may work before people trust what it means for them.
The line that stood out to me is that people are not only asking whether AI works — they are asking, “What does it mean about me if it does?”
That moves the conversation from implementation to identity, trust, leadership, and work design.
The idea of the “operator in the cab” is especially strong. It reinforces that leaders and managers are not just communicating change; they are absorbing anxiety while the system earns credibility.
That is the human gap organizations have to design for.
Elevator-analogy is one of the best ones for tech! And the human operator was present for a looooong time.
That's a brilliant way to look at it. Pushing it a little further, with AI there are still times when the rope breaks and the elevator falls at this point. I'm not sure we've gotten to the place with AI where the entire thing is fall-proof. Or maybe it's just that the elevator installation isn't fall-proof. ...The way we use AI, or create our solutions. But even now in the 2020's, if an elevator fails or falls (which doesn't really happen much), we would jump on maintenance, poor building design, to blame.... not the creator of the elevator. And who knew those elevator operators were just the Department store culture wrapped up in a uniform. I'll be mulling this over in my brain - thanks for the article!
Jason,
This is wonderful. It accurately shows the steps that must be taken to make anything that is innovated accepted by the public.
Having grown up during the end of the elevator operator era, they did perform one other function. The elevator would not always stop exactly level with the floor. The operator had a hand lever which allowed for the close stop to become an exact stop. Then the lever disappeared and the operator would just punch the button for the people. Once the people saw that that the elevator would stop without adjustment the attendant quietly went away.
People knew who had the newest equipment by seeing if there was an attendant with a lever, an attendant with buttons, or no attendant.
Business still needs to take this approach when rolling out anything new. Unfortunately, I see way too often the training and support of a new technology the first thing to be cut. Then management wonders why the technology did not deliver. It is not the technology that is bad, but the roll out was doomed from the beginning.
Thanks again. This was great.
Brilliant! I love a good historical analogy! 🙌