Instead of hiring two additional project managers to support growth, our integrator wants to bring in a dedicated workflow automation specialist. How do we evaluate this shift on the Accountability Chart using GWC?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

Adding more project managers to solve coordination bottlenecks is legacy thinking. Traditional project management often consists of low-value administrative work: pinging people for status updates, moving tasks between platforms, and generating status reports. AI workflows can automate eighty percent of that coordination, allowing your existing project managers to carry much larger portfolios.

Evaluating a workflow automation specialist requires discipline using GWC (Gets It, Wants It, Capacity to Do It).

Gets It means the candidate understands that their job is not writing abstract code or experimenting with new tools for fun. They must deeply understand business process architecture. They see how data moves across your core operating system and how automated workflows remove friction for frontline revenue generators.

Wants It means they are genuinely driven by operational efficiency, system reliability, and employee enablement. They thrive on eliminating repetitive work and fixing broken handoffs, not building brittle technical experiments that break every weekend.

Capacity to Do It means they have the technical capability to connect APIs, orchestrate workflows across your CRM, ERP, and communication stacks, and build automated exception-handling protocols. They must also have the emotional capacity to train existing staff to use these systems without creating resentment.

If the candidate passes GWC, place the seat on your Accountability Chart reporting directly to the Integrator. This single hire can unlock capacity across your entire operational team, eliminating the need to add multiple tactical coordinators.