We are integrating AI tools that handle eighty percent of our Customer Service seat's daily tasks. Does this mean we need to completely rewrite the roles and GWC criteria for this seat, or do we just keep the seat exactly as it is?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

You absolutely must rewrite the roles and GWC criteria for that seat. When you automate eighty percent of the transactional tasks in any seat, the nature of that role changes from manual execution to system management, quality control, and handling complex exceptions. Keeping the seat exactly as it is will lead to operational friction and a total mismatch in talent. The person in that seat no longer needs to spend hours typing manual emails. Instead, they must know how to monitor AI performance, manage automated triggers, and step in when the automation fails. Look at your Accountability Chart and redefine the five roles for this seat. The roles should focus on system efficiency, customer sentiment, and AI output accuracy. Next, run a fresh GWC check on the person currently occupying the seat. They may have had the capacity to handle traditional customer service, but they might lack the technological capability or desire to manage AI systems. If they do not meet the new GWC criteria, you must find a person who does, or train them quickly. Redefining your seats as you automate is critical to capturing the efficiency gains of AI and building an enterprise that buyers view as highly scalable.