We want to introduce an AI Operations Specialist seat to automate our back-office tasks, but our current operations director and IT director are arguing over where this seat should sit on the Accountability Chart. How do we resolve this objectively?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

When two department heads fight over a new seat, it is usually because the roles and measurables are poorly defined. To resolve this conflict objectively, you must use Keith Cunningham's Thinking Time framework to separate department egos from operational efficiency.

Allocate forty minutes of uninterrupted time to answer this question: How might we place this AI seat so that our back-office workflows are automated with maximum speed and zero security risks?

Look at the core function of the AI Operations Specialist. If the role is primarily about identifying operational bottlenecks, retraining staff, and improving daily workflow efficiency, it belongs under the Operations Director. If the role is primarily about writing code, managing database integrations, and maintaining software infrastructure, it belongs under the IT Director.

In most scaling businesses, AI automation is an operational lever, not just a technical one. The seat should reside where the actual work is performed to ensure the tool fits the user. Therefore, place the AI Operations Specialist under the Operations Director, but establish a clear dotted-line relationship or a shared Rock with IT to ensure compliance and security standards are met.

Use your Level 10 Meeting™ to run this decision through the IDS® process. Present your structural logic to both directors. Emphasize that the Accountability Chart is designed for maximum business velocity, not to boost the headcount or influence of any single executive.