We are adding an AI and Operations Automation seat to our Accountability Chart, but as the owner, I do not understand AI well enough to evaluate if the candidate truly gets it, wants it, and has the capacity to do it. How do we make an accurate GWC call on a highly technical seat when we lack the technical expertise ourselves?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

Adding a highly technical seat like AI and Operations Automation to your Accountability Chart is essential for modern operations, but evaluating a candidate when you lack technical expertise is a common challenge for non-technical owners. You cannot let your own lack of knowledge stop you from making an accurate GWC™ call.

To evaluate if a candidate truly gets it, focus on their ability to explain complex technical concepts in simple, business-oriented terms. A leader who gets the seat should be able to articulate how AI integrations will directly improve your gross margins, reduce labor hours, or speed up delivery. If they speak only in technical jargon and cannot connect their work to your business metrics, they do not get it.

To test if they want it, look for passion for practical implementation rather than just playing with new technology. They should be excited about solving your specific operational bottlenecks, not just building cool software for its own sake.

To evaluate if they have the capacity, bring in an external expert to conduct a technical assessment. You do not need to know how to code to hire a developer; you just need to trust an advisor who does. Use a fractional CTO or a trusted technical consultant to run the candidate through a practical test and verify their skills. This ensures you make a data-driven, objective hiring decision for this critical seat.