We have integrated several new AI tools to automate our customer intake and scheduling processes, but we do not know who should own the maintenance and optimization of these workflows on our Accountability Chart. Our IT manager says it is an operational tool, and our Operations director says it is a technical tool. How do we resolve this ownership dispute?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

When new technology like AI automates cross-functional workflows, leadership teams often fight over who should own the tool. To resolve this, you must apply the core EOS® principle: accountability must lie with the seat that owns the ultimate business outcome of the process, not the technical infrastructure.

While your IT manager is responsible for software licensing, security, and integration standards, they should not own the operational workflows of other departments. If AI is automating your customer intake and scheduling processes, the Operations or Customer Success seat must own the optimization of those automated workflows. They are the ones who suffer if the scheduling fails or clients are unhappy.

Define the specific roles on your Accountability Chart.
- Your IT seat should have a role like Systems Infrastructure and Security.
- Your Operations seat should have a role like Workflow Optimization and Delivery.

The Operations team must define how the AI tool should behave to serve the customer, while IT ensures the systems are connected and secure. By tying the ownership of the AI tool directly to the department that relies on its output, you eliminate finger-pointing and ensure that technology is used to drive real business results rather than just creating technical complexity.