AI Transformation Sprint
Move from an interesting use case to a deliberate adoption decision. Connect workflow value, organisational readiness and the changes needed to take the next step.
Choose a bounded adoption step with explicit prerequisites
- Workflow candidate
- Describe the task, exceptions and business consequence.
- Suitability question
- Examine reversibility, error tolerance and oversight.
- Readiness dependency
- Identify data, identity, evaluation and people gaps.
- Adoption choice
- Compare build, buy and partner routes before sequencing.
Decision and fit
Choose a bounded adoption step with explicit prerequisites
Compare the engagement with the decision you face
- A question worth resolving
- Choose a bounded adoption step with explicit prerequisites.
- An accountable participant
- Transformation sponsors comparing several possible agent initiatives and deciding which deserves the next investment.
- Inspectable source material
- The relevant owners can make workflow evidence and agreed inputs available for examination.
- A scope mismatch
- A platform has been selected and the only need is coding its integration.
The engagement
Move from an interesting use case to a deliberate adoption decision. Connect workflow value, organisational readiness and the changes needed to take the next step. A facilitated discovery sprint across selected business areas, ending in a prioritised adoption path rather than a production deployment.
The decision at stake
Leadership is under pressure to "do something with agents", pilots are proliferating without a shared view of value or risk, and it is unclear which workflows justify delegated action, what readiness gaps exist, and how to sequence adoption.
Suitable situations
- Transformation sponsors comparing several possible agent initiatives and deciding which deserves the next investment.
Less suitable situations
- Teams looking for a fixed-price implementation of a specific agent; this engagement decides what to build, not builds it.
- Organisations that have already committed to a platform and want validation of that choice only.
Worked situation
Follow one situation through to a bounded next decision
Illustrative working situation
Illustrative scenario
- Starting condition
A promising pilot lacks an owner for exceptional cases.
- Question to examine
Compare the workflow value with its oversight prerequisite.
- Possible next action
Resolve the ownership gap before committing the next stage.
Engagement boundary
Agree the work and its boundaries together
The engagement boundary
- Workflow candidate
- Opportunity discovery across selected business areas, with workflow-level candidates rather than generic use-case lists.
- Suitability question
- The inputs, authorised access and client participants are confirmed before scheduling.
- Transformation sponsor
- Retains organisational decisions and risk acceptance.
- Additional implementation
- Detailed solution design, procurement and implementation are separate work. Priorities should be revisited if evidence changes the value case or a prerequisite cannot be met.
What the work covers
- Opportunity discovery across selected business areas, with workflow-level candidates rather than generic use-case lists.
- Suitability assessment covering task structure, error tolerance, reversibility, oversight needs and data availability.
- Readiness assessment across data and integration, controls and identity, evaluation capability, operating model and people.
- Build-versus-buy-versus-partner analysis for the leading candidates.
- A sequenced adoption path with preconditions, owners and decision points.
Scope boundaries
- Building or integrating agents, selecting a vendor on your behalf, or negotiating commercial terms with platforms.
- Legal advice, formal certification or accredited assessment of any kind.
- Guarantees of business outcomes; the engagement produces a reasoned plan, not a result.
- Detailed solution design, procurement and implementation are separate work. Priorities should be revisited if evidence changes the value case or a prerequisite cannot be met.
Working sequence
How the work moves from question to handover
What each stage should leave your team with
- Frame the decision
A charter with the sponsor, business areas and exclusions.
- Discover and describe
Workflow candidates tied to real decisions and constraints.
- Assess suitability and readiness
Suitability and readiness evidence for shortlisted work.
- Compare options
Options that expose build, buy and partner tradeoffs.
- Sequence and brief
A sequenced adoption path with accountable owners.
How the work proceeds
- Frame the decision. Agree with sponsors which decisions the work must support, the areas in scope and the constraints that already apply.
- Discover and describe. Work with process owners to describe candidate workflows as they actually run, including exceptions and hand-offs.
- Assess suitability and readiness. Score each candidate against a transparent rubric and identify the gaps that would block or degrade an agent.
- Compare options. Evaluate build, buy and partner routes for the leading candidates against capability, control and cost considerations.
- Sequence and brief. Produce the adoption path, preconditions and decision points, then brief leadership and the teams who would own delivery.
Decision artefacts
Leave a record the next owner can use
Opportunity decision
Illustrative working format
- Subject and version
- Identify the workflow, configuration or proposal examined.
- Workflow candidate
- Record the relevant requirement and supporting material.
- Readiness dependency
- State the observation, supporting evidence and remaining uncertainty.
- Transformation sponsor
- Record the next decision, follow-up and unresolved question.
What the work can produce
- Prioritised opportunity register with suitability and readiness scores and the reasoning behind them.
- Readiness gap analysis and the preconditions that must be met before each candidate can proceed.
- Sequenced adoption path and decision points, suitable for steering-group review.
- Executive briefing that explains the recommendations and their trade-offs in plain language.
Engagement notes
Read the detailed engagement considerations
How the detailed notes connect
- Workflow candidate
- Describe the task, exceptions and business consequence.
- Suitability question
- Examine reversibility, error tolerance and oversight.
- Readiness dependency
- Identify data, identity, evaluation and people gaps.
Who this is for
This engagement suits organisations that have moved past curiosity and now need to decide what to fund. Typical sponsors are a chief technology, information or transformation officer, or the leader of an AI programme who is accountable for both value and risk. The people we work with day to day are process owners, architects and the teams who would eventually run the agents.
What “readiness” means here
Readiness is assessed across five dimensions, each of which can block or degrade an agent independently:
| Dimension | Question it answers |
|---|---|
| Data and integration | Can the agent observe the workflow state and act on the systems involved with reliable, permissioned access? |
| Controls and identity | Does the organisation know how to bound what an agent may do, on whose behalf, and how to revoke that authority? |
| Evaluation capability | Can anyone show, with evidence, how the agent behaves across its scope before and after release? |
| Operating model | Who owns the agent, its failures and its improvement, and how does that fit existing service management? |
| People and adoption | Are the affected roles understood, and is there a credible path for the people whose work changes? |
Gaps in any of these are recorded as findings with a proposed owner. They become the preconditions on the adoption path rather than assumptions buried in a business case.
How the work is scoped
Scope is agreed in the first step and recorded in a short charter: the business areas in play, the decisions the work must support, who is consulted, and what is explicitly out of scope. Changes to the charter are made deliberately and in writing so that the final recommendations can be read against what was actually asked.
Working together
Your team and our team need a clear working agreement
Who contributes and who decides
- Client sponsor
- Confirms the decision, priorities and people needed to resolve it.
- Client technical or process owner
- Provides the agreed evidence, access and review of findings or deliverables.
- Softlander delivery lead
- Coordinates the agreed activities, review points, handover and open actions.
- Authorised decision-maker
- Accepts deliverables against the agreed criteria and separately decides operational or business action.
What the work depends on
- Executive sponsorship, process owners, architects and affected operational leads contribute candidate workflows, pain points, constraints and current performance evidence. Reserve working sessions to challenge suitability and review tradeoffs.
- Access to process owners and a small number of subject-matter experts for structured conversations.
- Existing documentation on systems, data and controls where it exists; gaps are recorded as findings rather than assumed.
- An executive sponsor able to make or escalate scoping decisions.
Engagement availability
The start date, named delivery roles, review points and fee basis are agreed after confirming the inputs and scope. Duration depends on evidence access, system complexity and the time your decision-makers need to review the work.
Engagement and handover
Agree the delivery model and what completion means
A clear agreement from scope to ownership
- Scoped work
- Opportunity discovery across selected business areas, with workflow-level candidates rather than generic use-case lists.
- Indicative handover
- Prioritised opportunity register with suitability and readiness scores and the reasoning behind them; Readiness gap analysis and the preconditions that must be met before each candidate can proceed.
- Review and acceptance
- Review the agreed deliverables and record any open items, owners and conditions.
- Ongoing work
- Assign maintenance and operational ownership; agree additional scope and coverage explicitly.
A facilitated discovery sprint across selected business areas, ending in a prioritised adoption path rather than a production deployment.
Every prioritised candidate has a stated business problem, alternatives, readiness dependencies, owner and next decision. The steering group reviews the sequence and records which initiatives to explore, defer or stop.
Detailed solution design, procurement and implementation are separate work. Priorities should be revisited if evidence changes the value case or a prerequisite cannot be met.