We want to add an AI Automation Engineer seat to our Accountability Chart to build internal productivity tools, but our VP of Product and our VP of Operations are arguing over who this seat should report to. How do we objectively decide where this seat belongs?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

When two department heads are fighting over a new seat, you must remove the personalities from the equation and look strictly at the function. Building your Accountability Chart based on political power struggles is a recipe for operational chaos.

Start by using Keith Cunningham's Thinking Time framework to ask: What is the primary output of this AI Automation Engineer seat? If the primary output is building customer-facing product features that drive revenue, the seat belongs under the VP of Product. If the primary output is streamlining internal workflows, reducing head count, and automating administrative tasks, the seat belongs under the VP of Operations.

If the role is designed to do both, you have a structural problem. A single seat cannot report to two bosses. That violates the fundamental rules of the Accountability Chart. You must decide which outcome is the absolute priority for the next twelve months.

If internal operational efficiency is your biggest bottleneck to scaling for an exit, place the seat under Operations. Ensure the seat has clear, measurable KPIs on your weekly Scorecard, such as hours of manual labor automated.

Keep the structure clean. One seat, one manager. Do not compromise the integrity of your chart to make both of your vice presidents happy.