Rank an AI Automation Backlog
Use one explicit criterion per comparison, preserve evidence and test the resulting ranking for cycles and sensitivity.
18 minutes
Scenario
A services firm can run one AI pilot next quarter. Four opportunities remain after compliance screening: proposal drafting, invoice exception triage, meeting-note extraction and knowledge-base maintenance. Stakeholders keep switching between value, ease and personal preference.
- Your role
- Transformation analyst facilitating prioritisation
- Method
- Pairwise Comparison
Evidence pack
Proposal drafting
900 hours/year; moderate quality variance; requires client-data controls.
Invoice triage
1,400 hours/year; labelled historical outcomes; errors delay cash collection.
Meeting notes
1,100 hours/year; fast pilot; consent and retention rules vary by client.
Knowledge maintenance
700 hours/year; stale content affects all three other use cases.
Capacity
The pilot team has eight weeks and access to one process owner.
Criterion
The sponsor defines first-priority value as verified reduction in manual exception-handling hours within 90 days.
Uncertainty
Hours estimates have confidence bands of +/-15%, +/-10%, +/-25% and +/-30%.
Dependency
Proposal and triage pilots can use current approved knowledge; meeting notes cannot enter production until retention guidance is resolved.
Constraints
- Use the sponsor's single criterion for the main comparison round.
- Every win must have an evidence note and confidence label.
- A ranking is provisional if a material cycle or low-confidence pivotal comparison remains.
Case steps
Work through each prompt using the evidence pack. Answers and rubric weights stay protected in the interactive flow.
Translate the sponsor's criterion into a comparison question and state the decision boundary.
Complete all six unique pairwise comparisons for the four opportunities, recording winner, evidence and confidence.
Count wins, produce a provisional ranking and identify any A > B > C > A cycle or tied result.
Revisit the pivotal comparison under one alternative criterion and explain whether the pilot choice changes.