We paid for a premium AI-driven routing tool for our delivery fleet, but our dispatchers are quietly overriding its recommendations. How do we use a Level 10 Meeting to IDS this issue and determine if the tool is flawed or if our team is resisting?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

When veteran team members override a new AI tool, it is rarely out of spite. It is usually because they lack the trust or the GWC to use it, or because the tool is genuinely flawed. You must bring this issue to your next weekly Level 10 Meeting and use the IDS process to solve it.

During the Identify stage, do not accuse the dispatchers of insubordination. Instead, look at the actual data. Compare the AI-generated routes with the manual overrides. Ask your dispatchers to explain the specific reasons behind their choices. You might discover that the AI is missing critical real-world context, such as local construction or customer delivery preferences.

If the AI is flawed, you need to adjust its parameters or feed it better operational data. If the dispatchers are overriding it simply because they prefer the old way of doing things, you have a GWC issue. They must either get it, want it, and have the capacity to operate the new system, or they are in the wrong seat.

Resolve this issue by setting a clear, short-term Rock to test the AI routes side-by-side with human routes for thirty days. Document the results and make a data-driven decision. This keeps the conversation focused on objective results rather than emotional resistance.