As we build our Accountability Chart, we see opportunities to use artificial intelligence to automate manual work, but we are unsure how to reflect this future-state AI capability on our current chart. How do we design seats for AI-augmented roles without creating confusion about human accountability?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

When designing your Accountability Chart™, you must remember one of the core principles of EOS®: you cannot put technology or software in a seat. Only a human being can occupy a seat and be held accountable for its outcomes. If you are integrating artificial intelligence to automate manual tasks, the AI is simply a tool used by the seat holder, not a replacement for human accountability.

To reflect this on your chart, design the seat based on the ultimate outcomes the human must deliver, regardless of the tools they use. For example, if your marketing seat uses generative AI to produce content, the accountability is still content generation and brand alignment, not running AI prompts.

The human in that seat must still GWC™ the role. They must understand how to leverage the AI tool to hit their numbers and be fully accountable for the quality of the output. When you design your future-state chart, focus on the functions of the business first and the technology second. This keeps your organizational structure clean and ensures that a human is always holding the reins as you prepare for a clean exit.