We want to use AI to automate our operational workflows, but we are worried this will disrupt our Accountability Chart. How do we redefine GWC™ for leadership roles when a significant portion of their work is being automated?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

When you integrate AI into your operations, the fundamental structure of your Accountability Chart does not change, but the way we evaluate GWC™ does. We must redefine what it means to Get, Want, and have the Capacity to do a job when technology alters the work itself. Getting the job means the individual deeply understands how AI tools transform their department's throughput. Wanting the job means they are genuinely enthusiastic about leading an automated, high leverage department, rather than resisting technology out of fear of displacement. Capacity is where the biggest shift occurs. Capacity no longer means having the physical hours to perform manual tasks; it means having the cognitive capacity and technological literacy to direct, audit, and optimize AI outputs. In our sessions, we rebuild your seat descriptions to reflect this shift. We focus on the high value, creative, and strategic aspects of each role that technology cannot replicate. By updating your Accountability Chart to account for these new capabilities, you ensure that your team members are not just passive users of software, but are actively driving efficiency and building a highly scalable, AI powered organization.