Mirror
Self-serve, and worth running again as the organization changes.
How we work
Nothing here is a maturity model. Each dimension is a state we can describe and change.
Where the work is
40%
Expected in use
Possible, and actually in use.
60%
Possible, and not happening
Nothing technical is stopping this. It is the part we work on.
What you get
Always in this order, and not three stages of maturity.
Self-serve, and worth running again as the organization changes.
What to sequence, what to redesign, what to stop.
The same finding as a fundable case. The part a champion carries upstairs.
Mirror · 1
Not where leadership believes it is.
how things work here
Where the organization is, not where leadership thinks it is.
who really decides
Who allocates the resources and owns the outcome.
how people think
System thinkers, executors and experimenters, and in what proportion.
where freed time goes
Where freed capacity goes, and where it quietly does not.
what gets rewarded
Whether the rewards support the target model or contradict it.
people readiness
Which teams are ready for which model.
do leaders walk it
Whether what leaders do matches what they are asking for.
The mark on each card is where that dimension sits on the diagram below, clockwise from the top.
What the mirror is read against
Not three levels of sophistication. The order is how much of the deciding the AI takes over: the more a project decides on its own, the more has to already be true around it.
Takes volume off people.
The work happens the way it always did, there is just less of it for a person to do. Nobody’s authority changes.
1 condition has to hold
Fits regulated industries and operational excellence.
Supports expert judgment.
A person still decides, now with a machine’s suggestion in front of them. Some authority is shared.
2 conditions have to hold
Fits professional services and expertise-driven cultures.
Runs whole processes.
The machine decides and acts, and a person looks at the exceptions. Most of the authority has moved.
4 conditions have to hold
Fits technology and high-agility cultures.
Choose a kind of AI
Choose a dimension to see what it reads, and whether it is make-or-break for AI assistance.
AI assistance: 1 condition has to hold
Method · 2
Every project in front of you is one of these four. Saying which is the work.
What goes first, and what waits.
What cannot work in its current shape.
What will not clear, said early enough to be cheap.
Which moves first, because the rest follow.
Mostly through three of the seven above: Decision rights, Incentives, Capacity flow.
Mandate · 3
It starts by separating what you answer for from what you can actually call.
Accountable for
Can decide
Accountable for, cannot decide
The ask
One named person, one decision, one date.
Alongside all three
We redesign the system. We coach the leaders inside it. Two different verbs on purpose: a system changed around a leader who was never supported to run it reverts, usually within a quarter.
Not a fourth part. It runs through all three.
What they are actually optimizing for, including the parts nobody says out loud.
Whether their stated priorities and their calendar agree.
The story they use to explain the change, and whether it survives contact.
What they asked for, what people heard, and the gap.
How it runs
Name what is structural and what is only difficult.
Redesign them with the people who will have to operate the result.
Run the first cycle under the new rules, with us in the room.
Coach the leaders until it holds without us, and stop.
Two short reads
Neither scores your organization and neither issues a verdict. Both do sums on what you tell them. Nothing you type leaves your browser.
Rate seven behaviors twice: what leadership says matters, and what actually happens. The finding is the distance.
Write down what actually happens, then say what it costs and whether it can be named.
Next
Tell us about one decision that keeps getting stuck, and who would need to agree to it. That is enough to start.