Our leadership team is debating who actually owns our AI tools. The operations head thinks they own it, but the IT manager claims it falls under their seat. How do we resolve this Accountability Chart conflict using the GWC framework?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

When multiple leaders fight over who owns your AI tools, it is a clear sign of structural ambiguity on your Accountability Chart. Typically, the head of IT believes they should own AI because it is technology, while the head of operations believes they should own it because it drives service delivery. To resolve this conflict, you must return to first principles and use the GWC™ framework.

IT is responsible for infrastructure, data security, procurement, and system integration. They ensure the AI tools are safe, connected, and functioning. Operations, on the other hand, is responsible for using those tools to deliver value to your clients.

Therefore, the accountability for AI strategy and utilization belongs in the operations seat. The operations leader must GWC™ the responsibility of identifying how AI can streamline workflows and improve client outcomes. IT simply supports that vision by building or licensing the necessary infrastructure. If you let IT own the operational strategy, you will end up with highly secure, cutting edge tools that nobody actually uses. Clarify these roles on your Accountability Chart, update the respective roles and responsibilities, and ensure both leaders are aligned on how they must collaborate to drive the business forward.