AI Employee Org Chartby AIAutomating.com

Fictional example diagnostic

Brightline Plumbing (fictional)

Residential plumbing maintenance and repair For: Local homeowners

Roles and business summary were confirmed in the assessment. Task recommendations and economics remain scenarios to validate in a pilot.

Website unavailable: this diagnostic uses the manual business summary and assessment answers.

Evidence and confirmed answers
User-confirmed selections
Team size: 6 to 15. Time drains: Sales and follow-up, Operations and fulfillment, Reporting and data. Bottleneck: Everything runs through me. Planned hiring: Operations coordinator. AI maturity: It's built into how we work.
User-confirmed business summary
Residential plumbing maintenance and repair · Local homeowners · Service business
Website observations
No retrieved page evidence available.
Model inferences and benchmark assumptions
Role suggestions remain inferred until you confirm them. Feasible automation shares, human-review effort, and maintenance are planning assumptions; workload and labor cost come from the assessment or remain unknown.

Recommended first pilot

Operations coordination: coordination and reliability pilot

Ranked #1 with 82/100 planning points. This is an opportunity ranking, not a payback forecast.

  • You selected “Everything runs through me” as the primary bottleneck.
  • You selected “Operations and fulfillment” as a time drain.
  • This scope routes work and exceptions to named owners, directly addressing owner dependence.
  • You said AI is built into how you work. Start by auditing coverage, reliability, and handoffs in your existing setup.
  • Ranked 1 of 4 using the published scoring weights (82/100). Next opportunity: 69/100.
  • You estimated 6-15 team task hours/week in this work group; weekly volume: 10 to 50 items; current handling: partly automated.

Expected pilot outcome: validate whether the scoped workflow reduces net task time while keeping approvals, quality, and exceptions under human control.

Owner: Owner to assign

Confirmed functions, suggested AI support

Select any role to review its detailed scope. Current functions and planned hires are separate. Confirm uncertain roles before assigning work.

Brightline Plumbing (fictional)Accountable human leadership

Operations coordination

Sales and follow-up

Reporting and data

Delivery

Automates routine tasks · Assists your team · Human-led. Every scope retains a responsible person.

Top three opportunities

Scores combine bottleneck fit (25), workload (15), benefit (10), effort (10), readiness (10), remaining automation opportunity (10), review feasibility (7), risk (8), and volume (5). Unknown workload and readiness receive no evidence points. Low-risk support work scores above autonomous sensitive decisions.

1. Operations coordination: coordination and reliability pilot

82/100

You selected “Operations and fulfillment” as a time drain. This scope routes work and exceptions to named owners, directly addressing owner dependence.

Why this rank, assumptions, and what could change it
bottleneck
25 points
workload
6 points
benefit
10 points
effort
7 points
readiness
10 points
automation
6 points
review
7 points
risk
8 points
volume
3 points
  • You said AI is built into how you work. Start by auditing coverage, reliability, and handoffs in your existing setup.
  • Ranked 1 of 4 using the published scoring weights (82/100). Next opportunity: 69/100.
  • You estimated 6-15 team task hours/week in this work group; weekly volume: 10 to 50 items; current handling: partly automated.
  • Role confirmed by you.
  • You estimated 6-15 team task hours per week.
  • Data readiness: accessible.
  • Existing automation: partial.
  • A different measured workload or existing automation coverage could change this rank.
  • Confirm data access, approval effort, and exception rate before choosing the pilot.

Medium: connect one work queue and define routing rules

2. Sales and follow-up: coordination and reliability pilot

69/100

You selected “Sales and follow-up” as a time drain. This is a scoped sales and follow-up pilot to validate against that bottleneck.

Why this rank, assumptions, and what could change it
bottleneck
12 points
workload
6 points
benefit
10 points
effort
7 points
readiness
10 points
automation
6 points
review
7 points
risk
8 points
volume
3 points
  • You said AI is built into how you work. Start by auditing coverage, reliability, and handoffs in your existing setup.
  • Ranked 2 of 4 using the published scoring weights (69/100).
  • You estimated 6-15 team task hours/week in this work group; weekly volume: 10 to 50 items; current handling: partly automated.
  • Role confirmed by you.
  • You estimated 6-15 team task hours per week.
  • Data readiness: accessible.
  • Existing automation: partial.
  • A different measured workload or existing automation coverage could change this rank.
  • Confirm data access, approval effort, and exception rate before choosing the pilot.

Medium: connect one lead source and agree on follow-up rules

3. Reporting and data: coordination and reliability pilot

69/100

You selected “Reporting and data” as a time drain. This is a scoped reporting and data pilot to validate against that bottleneck.

Why this rank, assumptions, and what could change it
bottleneck
12 points
workload
6 points
benefit
10 points
effort
7 points
readiness
10 points
automation
6 points
review
7 points
risk
8 points
volume
3 points
  • You said AI is built into how you work. Start by auditing coverage, reliability, and handoffs in your existing setup.
  • Ranked 3 of 4 using the published scoring weights (69/100).
  • You estimated 6-15 team task hours/week in this work group; weekly volume: 10 to 50 items; current handling: partly automated.
  • Role confirmed by you.
  • You estimated 6-15 team task hours per week.
  • Data readiness: accessible.
  • Existing automation: partial.
  • A different measured workload or existing automation coverage could change this rank.
  • Confirm data access, approval effort, and exception rate before choosing the pilot.

Medium: agree on metrics and connect a consistent data export

Transparent capacity scenarios

This view recalculates locally as you change assumptions. Low, expected, and high values are planning ranges, not measured savings. Shared work groups are counted once, in ranking order. The default shared task budget is 40 hours/week; confirm your budget before interpreting totals.

Formula: allocated confirmed task hours/week × feasible automation share × (1 − human review share), less maintenance hours/week. Multiply net hours by working weeks and your loaded hourly cost for capacity value. No headcount multiplier.

Current capacity recovered

6.5 h/week

Expected scenario across unique work groups.

Annual capacity value

Hours only

Labor cost unknown. No dollar estimate shown.

Potential future hiring avoidance

Not priced

Planned hires contribute no current payroll savings. Confirm hiring need and cost separately.

Potential revenue impact

Not estimated

Baseline and conversion assumptions were not supplied.

Implementation cost: Not supplied. Ongoing cost/year: Not supplied. These costs stay separate from capacity value; no cash return or payback is asserted.

Detailed role scopes

Operations coordination

Assists your team · Current function · User-confirmed role

Suggested scope: Collect status updates from agreed work queues

Tasks, controls, evidence, and estimate assumptions

Tasks AI supports or handles

  • Collect status updates from agreed work queues
  • Draft the daily priorities and identify missing handoffs
  • Route overdue or blocked work to the responsible person

Your team retains

  • Set priorities and assign accountable owners
  • Approve changes to customer commitments
  • Resolve cross-team trade-offs

Approvals: The assigned human owner approves customer-facing output, material record changes, and exceptions before action.

Exception handling: Pause and notify the owner when inputs are missing, conflicting, sensitive, or outside the approved scope.

Systems: Example work queue, example calendar

Current work-group scenario based on your workload range.

Weekly net capacity: low 0.5 h · expected 2.4 h · high 5.5 h.

Annual capacity value: Hours only; loaded hourly cost unknown.

  • Workload range supplied by you, across the team; headcount is not multiplied.
  • Feasible automation share: 20-50%; scenario assumption, not measured performance.
  • Deduct 20% for human review and 0.5 hour/week for maintenance.
  • Annualization: 46 working weeks supplied in the assessment.
  • One allocation per work group; remaining shared task budget: 25 hours/week.
  • You selected “Everything runs through me” as the primary bottleneck.
  • You selected “Operations and fulfillment” as a time drain.
  • This scope routes work and exceptions to named owners, directly addressing owner dependence.
  • You said AI is built into how you work. Start by auditing coverage, reliability, and handoffs in your existing setup.
  • Ranked 1 of 4 using the published scoring weights (82/100). Next opportunity: 69/100.
  • You estimated 6-15 team task hours/week in this work group; weekly volume: 10 to 50 items; current handling: partly automated.

Sales and follow-up

Assists your team · Current function · User-confirmed role

Suggested scope: Draft follow-up from recorded lead context

Tasks, controls, evidence, and estimate assumptions

Tasks AI supports or handles

  • Draft follow-up from recorded lead context
  • Prepare meeting notes and update an approved lead record
  • Flag overdue follow-ups for the sales owner

Your team retains

  • Lead discovery and negotiate scope and pricing
  • Approve outbound messages and customer commitments

Approvals: The assigned human owner approves customer-facing output, material record changes, and exceptions before action.

Exception handling: Pause and notify the owner when inputs are missing, conflicting, sensitive, or outside the approved scope.

Systems: Example work queue, example calendar

Current work-group scenario based on your workload range.

Weekly net capacity: low 0.5 h · expected 2.4 h · high 5.5 h.

Annual capacity value: Hours only; loaded hourly cost unknown.

  • Workload range supplied by you, across the team; headcount is not multiplied.
  • Feasible automation share: 20-50%; scenario assumption, not measured performance.
  • Deduct 20% for human review and 0.5 hour/week for maintenance.
  • Annualization: 46 working weeks supplied in the assessment.
  • One allocation per work group; remaining shared task budget: 10 hours/week.
  • You selected “Everything runs through me” as the primary bottleneck.
  • You selected “Sales and follow-up” as a time drain.
  • This is a scoped sales and follow-up pilot to validate against that bottleneck.
  • You said AI is built into how you work. Start by auditing coverage, reliability, and handoffs in your existing setup.
  • Ranked 2 of 4 using the published scoring weights (69/100).
  • You estimated 6-15 team task hours/week in this work group; weekly volume: 10 to 50 items; current handling: partly automated.

Reporting and data

Assists your team · Current function · User-confirmed role

Suggested scope: Combine approved exports into a recurring report

Tasks, controls, evidence, and estimate assumptions

Tasks AI supports or handles

  • Combine approved exports into a recurring report
  • Flag missing records and unusual changes
  • Draft a summary with links to source records

Your team retains

  • Approve definitions and verify material discrepancies
  • Interpret results and decide what action to take

Approvals: The assigned human owner approves customer-facing output, material record changes, and exceptions before action.

Exception handling: Pause and notify the owner when inputs are missing, conflicting, sensitive, or outside the approved scope.

Systems: Example work queue, example calendar

Current work-group scenario based on your workload range.

Weekly net capacity: low 0.5 h · expected 1.7 h · high 3.5 h.

Annual capacity value: Hours only; loaded hourly cost unknown.

  • Workload range supplied by you, across the team; headcount is not multiplied.
  • Feasible automation share: 20-50%; scenario assumption, not measured performance.
  • Deduct 20% for human review and 0.5 hour/week for maintenance.
  • Annualization: 46 working weeks supplied in the assessment.
  • One allocation per work group; remaining shared task budget: 0 hours/week.
  • You selected “Everything runs through me” as the primary bottleneck.
  • You selected “Reporting and data” as a time drain.
  • This is a scoped reporting and data pilot to validate against that bottleneck.
  • You said AI is built into how you work. Start by auditing coverage, reliability, and handoffs in your existing setup.
  • Ranked 3 of 4 using the published scoring weights (69/100).
  • You estimated 6-15 team task hours/week in this work group; weekly volume: 10 to 50 items; current handling: partly automated.

Service delivery

Human-led · Current function · User-confirmed role

Suggested scope: Prepare job notes from approved customer inputs

Tasks, controls, evidence, and estimate assumptions

Tasks AI supports or handles

  • Prepare job notes from approved customer inputs
  • Maintain a checklist and flag missing documentation
  • Draft delivery status summaries for review

Your team retains

  • Deliver licensed, physical, and relationship-critical services
  • Approve quality and customer commitments

Approvals: The assigned human owner approves customer-facing output, material record changes, and exceptions before action.

Exception handling: Pause and notify the owner when inputs are missing, conflicting, sensitive, or outside the approved scope.

Systems: Example work queue, example calendar

Human-led delivery: no current automation estimate assigned.

Weekly net capacity: low 0 h · expected 0 h · high 0 h.

Annual capacity value: Hours only; loaded hourly cost unknown.

  • Workload unknown: no capacity value counted.
  • Feasible automation share: 20-50%; scenario assumption, not measured performance.
  • Deduct 20% for human review and 0.5 hour/week for maintenance.
  • Annualization: 46 working weeks supplied in the assessment.
  • One allocation per work group; remaining shared task budget: 0 hours/week.
  • You selected “Everything runs through me” as the primary bottleneck.
  • This is a scoped service delivery pilot to validate against that bottleneck.
  • You said AI is built into how you work. Start by auditing coverage, reliability, and handoffs in your existing setup.
  • Ranked 4 of 4 using the published scoring weights (21/100).

30-day pilot: Operations coordination: coordination and reliability pilot

Business problem
Everything runs through me
Human owner
Owner to assign
Trigger
A new work item or overdue handoff arrives.
Required inputs
A representative record, its current status, accountable owner, and approved routing rules for operations.
Systems
Example work queue, example calendar
Expected output
Collect status updates from agreed work queues; Draft the daily priorities and identify missing handoffs; Route overdue or blocked work to the responsible person
Approval points
The assigned human owner approves customer-facing output, material record changes, and exceptions before action.
Failure and escalation
Pause and notify the owner when inputs are missing, conflicting, sensitive, or outside the approved scope.
Prerequisites
Confirm baseline, access permissions, task boundaries, owner, representative cases, and rollback procedure.
Implementation effort
Medium: connect one work queue and define routing rules
Success measures
Net task time, approval compliance, exception rate, material errors, and rework. Measure a baseline in Week 1.

  1. Week 1

    Assign a human owner for operations coordination. Sample 10 representative items, record task time, exceptions, and existing automation. Confirm one trigger, output, data permissions, and a pause rule.

  2. Week 2

    Configure a test-only workflow for: collect status updates from agreed work queues. Test normal, missing-data, duplicate, and sensitive cases. The owner must approve all test outputs before enabling a pilot.

  3. Week 3

    Run a limited operations coordination pilot on one queue with human approval. Track handled items, minutes spent including review, errors, rework, and escalations. Pause on an unauthorized action or a material error.

  4. Week 4

    Compare net task time and quality with the Week 1 baseline. Proposed acceptance: 100% of required approvals captured, zero unauthorized actions, and at least 20% lower net task time without a higher material-error rate. Agree thresholds before launch; expand only if met.