Time for business functions to establish their own AI-related roles and capabilities

Informed debate on AI-related topics is definitely broadening towards ‘how’ organizations might make decisions on deploying AI. As with every plan and every journey, mistakes and omissions are more than possible.

For example, I recently came across a major analyst firm’s graphic, being used to illustrate the variety of new, AI-related roles that organizations should consider establishing – 10 or so role types in all. Studying this more, I noticed that the roles were distributed across the IT development and IT operations capabilities. At this point, I detached completely from the content provided – because the capabilities being described were clearly nothing like broad enough.

To be clear, the ‘gap’ I’m identifying is a further need for AI-related capabilities, within operational business units that are working to strategize and plan paths to AI adoption. It’s time to adapt a mantra from 10-15 years ago to remind us “There are no AI projects; just business projects that involve using AI” – and pin it on a digital wall. For any organization, critical project objectives and success criteria for AI-related projects will be best determined by the leaders of operational functions, advised by their own product managers, operations heads and others.

People in these roles must develop increased understanding of some technical AI matters, as background, but also appreciate how AI projects may change how processes accommodate business requirements such as labour/resourcing, financing, governance, risk/compliance management, and others. In time, projects might give rise to a number of roles for appropriate AI experts that work within the business function itself, but even at the planning stage an AI domain expert (i.e. with function-specific experience) and an AI architect would bring valuable insight.

Other, typically ‘centralized’, capabilities (e.g. HR, finance, and procurement) will also need AI-savvy expertise, early in the AI planning/adoption journey. Whether or not these business areas undertake their own projects using AI, they will need to take responsibility for management of a number of issues that arise from AI use in business units. For example, HR is already the centre of expertise for codes of conduct, organizational culture, and performance management, so should have a seat at the table when these and other requirements in their domain are tackled in relation to AI-based operations. In HR, and across other key enterprise capabilities, development of new strategy is also needed to understand how other areas of responsibility (e.g. retention of key expertise) may be directly or indirectly affected as AI is deployed.

Because leveraging AI to the greatest advantage will define many organizations’ futures (and perhaps survival), be assured that Bloor Research will focus intensely on getting the strategy right. Our coverage of other technologies always has a business perspective primarily – in the case of advice on AI, that will also be the most important foundation, so that AI serves the business in a way that works to best advantage. As is well-known, the ‘IT’ aspect of AI’s future promise has further to develop – but getting the organizational approach too far wrong is likely to carry more risk than can be rectified by technology experts.