Skip to content
Readiness check

Eight statements. One honest look.

A short, private self-check across the eight themes where AI activity most often fails to become value. It takes about three minutes and produces a narrative reflection and a discussion agenda — not a score, and not a diagnosis.

Private by design. Nothing you select leaves your browser. There is no score, no form, and no data submitted — the reflection is computed entirely on this page, and clears when you close the tab.

The check

How true is each statement of your organisation?

Eight statements, one at a time.

Answer from your honest sense of how things are — not how the strategy deck says they should be. "Not sure" is a legitimate answer; in A2V, not knowing is itself a signal.

  1. If we stopped all AI activity tomorrow, we could name the business numbers that would suffer — and who owns them. (Value clarity)
  2. When someone claims an AI initiative saved time or money, there is a baseline measurement behind the claim. (Benefit validation)
  3. Our AI initiatives have decision dates — some have been deliberately scaled, and some deliberately stopped. (Use-case discipline)
  4. When we say an AI initiative is "working", that view rests on more than what its sponsors tell us. (Evidence quality)
  5. People at the frontline can say what our AI rules mean for their work — and would feel safe reporting an AI mistake. (Governance & trust)
  6. Our managers have changed how their teams' work flows because of AI — not just attended the same training as everyone else. (Workforce & manager fluency)
  7. For the workflows where AI matters most, someone owns the flow end to end — across team boundaries. (Workflow ownership)
  8. When a pilot works, we know what it takes to make it the default way of working — and it usually sticks. (Pilot-to-scale discipline)

The interactive version of this check needs JavaScript. The statements above are the whole instrument — the honest conversation they prompt is the point. If several feel uncomfortable, that is exactly what an introductory conversation is for.

The reflection is a starting point. The useful part is testing it against evidence.

Start a conversation