Self-guided worksheet. This reading edition provides questions and evidence criteria. It does not calculate a score, produce a radar chart, compare peers, save answers, email results or generate a PDF.

Connect the business thesis to a specific workflow, the people who run it and the evidence that would justify continued investment.

How to use it

Choose one workflow. For each question, record the answer, source, owner, date, gap and next check in your team’s document. Use “unknown” when the evidence is absent. Repeat after a material workflow change to compare your own records.

State the business thesis

What customer or operating result should improve, and why does AI belong in this workflow?

Evidence to collect: A defined job, current constraint and measurable acceptance condition.

Test workforce readiness

Can the responsible team review, correct and operate the changed workflow?

Evidence to collect: Role-specific work examples and observed review decisions rather than a training attendance count.

Choose the sequence

Which dependency must be resolved before the next workflow can succeed?

Evidence to collect: Data access, tool permissions, process ownership and a bounded first use case.

Define the control boundary

Which actions may the agent take, and which require a human decision?

Evidence to collect: An action policy, escalation path and evidence for denied or ambiguous cases.

Set the investment review

What evidence would justify scaling, revising or stopping?

Evidence to collect: Comparable outcomes, full review/recovery effort and the owner who accepts the result.

Turn the gaps into a bounded next step

Start with the most consequential unresolved job. Agree what would establish a better result, test the correction, and retain the source and outcome limits.

Use the reliability workflow worksheet · Explore Tensile · Discuss a concrete workflow