Kamron started work as a loan officer at a bank in Namangan in September. The bank had one main rule for small loans: the monthly payment must be less than 40 percent of the applicant's monthly income.
His first file was a shopkeeper who wanted a loan with a monthly payment of 900 dollars. The question on the form was simple: does the applicant qualify? The file contained one more fact: the shopkeeper's income was exactly 2,000 dollars a month.
Kamron did the arithmetic. Nine hundred out of two thousand is 45 percent, which is above the limit. He wrote "information insufficient" on the file and asked the shopkeeper for more documents.
His supervisor, Gulnoza, returned the file the same afternoon. "The information was sufficient," she said. "You have a definite answer. It is no." Kamron had confused two different things: an answer he did not like and an answer he did not have.
She showed him a case that really was insufficient. Another applicant wanted a payment of 900 dollars and had written only that his income was "more than 2,000 dollars". If he earned 2,100, the payment was about 43 percent and he did not qualify. If he earned 3,000, it was 30 percent and he did. The same facts allowed both a yes and a no, so more information was truly needed.
Kamron kept that distinction on a card on his desk. Information is sufficient when every possible case gives the same answer, whether that answer is yes or no. It is insufficient only when the facts still leave room for both. The shopkeeper, meanwhile, received a polite letter and an offer of a smaller loan he could afford.