AI for Team and Tech Leads · 2 to 3 hours
Measure an AI pilot's quality, cost, and return
Judge a six-week AI order-entry pilot against a team that did not use the tool, count its full cost and quality per order channel, and recommend whether to expand, fix, or stop it with a budget cap and a review date.
Business case
3 h
Used in interview rounds:
Leadership Scenarios (Medium)1
Step 1: The question
You run the order desk in the scenario. Using the pilot results, the draft audit, and the cost sheet, work out what the AI drafting tool really saves per order compared with Team B, what quality it delivers in each order channel, and what it costs per month in full. Then recommend to the operations director and finance whether to expand, fix, or stop the tool, and for which orders, with an owner, conditions, a budget cap and spend alert, a stop rule, and a review date.
Scenario: the order-desk pilot
Suppose you manage the order desk at a fictional building-supplies wholesaler. Twenty-four order-desk staff enter customer orders into the order system. Orders arrive as typed emails, PDF purchase orders, and handwritten faxes scanned to PDF. Phone orders, quotes, and delivery queries are outside this case; the hours below are order entry only.
For six weeks, Vendor A's AI drafting tool read each incoming order document and filled an order draft: customer, items, quantities, SKUs (stock codes), and delivery date. A person reviewed every draft, fixed it if needed, and submitted it. Vendor A also offers an auto-submit mode for drafts it marks as high confidence; it was not used.
Twelve staff volunteered and became Team A, which used the tool. The other twelve formed Team B and worked as before. One rotation assigns orders to both teams, so each team gets about 1,200 orders a week with the same mix of customers and channels: 50% typed email, 40% PDF, 10% fax, in both periods. The baseline is the four weeks before the pilot, with the same people in each team.
Table 1. Team totals
| Measure | Team A baseline (4 weeks) | Team A pilot (6 weeks) | Team B baseline (4 weeks) | Team B pilot (6 weeks) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Orders submitted | 4,800 | 7,200 | 4,800 | 7,200 |
| Staff hours on order entry | 720 | 780 | 768 | 1,128 |
| Orders corrected after submission | 96 | 216 | 96 | 144 |
| Rework minutes (correction log) | 1,920 | 4,320 | 1,920 | 2,880 |
| Escalations to a supervisor | 48 | 108 | 48 | 72 |
Table 2. Handling minutes per order, by channel
| Channel | Team A baseline | Team A pilot | Team B baseline | Team B pilot |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Typed email | 8.0 | 5.4 | 8.6 | 8.4 |
| PDF purchase order | 9.5 | 6.3 | 10.1 | 9.9 |
| Handwritten fax | 12.0 | 12.8 | 12.6 | 12.4 |
Table 3. Orders corrected after submission per 100 orders, by channel
| Channel | Team A baseline | Team A pilot | Team B baseline | Team B pilot |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Typed email | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.5 |
| PDF purchase order | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 |
| Handwritten fax | 2.5 | 12.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 |
Rules and other facts
- Staff hours cover reading the document, reviewing or keying the draft, checking stock, escalating, and submitting.
- An order counts as corrected when anything on it (quantity, SKU, delivery date, customer) is changed within 30 days after submission because it was wrong. The figures were pulled 30 days after the pilot ended, so every count is complete.
- Rework minutes are the time spent fixing corrected orders, logged apart from staff hours. Each correction took about 20 minutes, in both teams and both periods.
- Weekly handling minutes per order in the baseline weeks: Team A 9.1, 9.0, 9.0, 8.9; Team B 9.7, 9.6, 9.6, 9.5.
- Team A's weekly handling minutes per order in the six pilot weeks: 7.4, 6.9, 6.3, 6.2, 6.1, 6.1.
- In the pilot, 11 of the 12 Team A staff had lower handling minutes per email or PDF order than in their own baseline weeks.
Scenario: the draft audit
During the pilot, a quality analyst checked 500 AI drafts before staff review, comparing each field with the source document. Drafts were picked at random within each channel, and faxes were oversampled on purpose. A draft counts once for a field when any line has that field wrong. A draft can have more than one wrong field, so the field columns add up to more than the last column.
| Channel | Drafts checked | Quantity wrong | SKU wrong | Delivery date wrong | Drafts with at least one wrong field |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Typed email | 200 | 4 | 8 | 6 | 16 |
| PDF purchase order | 200 | 2 | 6 | 2 | 9 |
| Handwritten fax | 100 | 14 | 22 | 9 | 34 |
| Total | 500 | 20 | 36 | 17 | 59 |
Most SKU errors on email and PDF drafts were customers' own part numbers that the tool matched to a similar SKU.
Scenario: volumes, costs, and the vendor dashboard
Volumes. Finance converts weekly volume to months with 52 weeks / 12 months: 1,200 x 52 / 12 = 5,200 orders per team per month, or 10,400 for the desk (5,200 email, 4,160 PDF, 1,040 fax).
Cost sheet
| Item | Amount | When |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor A platform fee, any number of users | $2,450 a month (fictional price) | Monthly |
| Vendor A usage charge | $0.17 per document the tool reads (fictional price) | Monthly |
| Vendor A setup and connector to the order system | $14,500 (fictional price) | One-time |
| Internal IT integration | 160 hours at $68 an hour | One-time |
| Training | 3 hours per person at $44 an hour | One-time, per person who will use the tool |
| Tool owner (a senior order-desk member): templates, SKU list, vendor tickets | 20 hours a month at $44 an hour | Monthly |
| Monthly quality audit | 200 drafts at 3 minutes each, at $44 an hour | Monthly |
| IT support | 6 hours a month at $68 an hour | Monthly |
| Re-delivery and restocking per corrected order (logistics team average) | $23.50 | Per correction |
$44 and $68 are fictional loaded costs per hour (pay plus overheads). Internal monthly costs are the same for any scope.
Finance's rules
- A freed staff hour is worth $44 because the desk now buys about 450 agency-temp hours a month at a similar cost. Freed hours above 450 a month are capacity, not cash.
- Rework time counts through the minutes per order (handling plus rework), not as a separate cost line.
- Count re-delivery cost only for corrections above the comparison team's rate.
- Net monthly benefit = value of freed hours minus total monthly cost.
- Payback in months = one-time costs divided by net monthly benefit. One-time costs = setup, IT integration, and training for everyone who will use the tool, including what was spent for the pilot.
The vendor dashboard. Vendor A's dashboard for the pilot reads: "7,200 drafts created. Time saved: 960 hours (8 minutes per draft, the default setting)." Vendor A's account manager suggests finance use this figure, doubled for the whole desk.
Documents charged. Documents charged during the pilot: 9,060. In pilot week 4, a mailbox rule sent every message in the shared inbox to the tool for two days, including newsletters and delivery notices; those 1,860 extra documents, none of them orders, were read and charged.
Spend controls. Vendor A's console can set a monthly document cap (when it is reached, new orders skip the tool and go to manual entry) and send an alert at any document count.
Constraints
- Use only the figures in the three scenario sections, and state any assumption you add, such as how Team B will respond.
- Follow finance's rules for valuing freed hours, re-delivery cost, and payback.
- Rates and a plain note on small counts are enough; no statistical tests or intervals.
- No coding is needed.
Deliverables
- Net minutes saved per order compared with Team B, overall and per channel, and monthly net hours
- A quality read-out per channel from corrections and the draft audit
- Total monthly cost, cost per order, net monthly benefit, and payback for the scope you recommend and at least one alternative
- What the vendor's time-saved figure leaves out, and the figure you would report instead
- A recommendation with scope, owner, conditions, budget cap and spend alert, stop rule, and review date
2
Step 2: Hints
Optional. Each hint gives a little more away.
3
Step 3: Work through it
Predict the outcome
Work the pilot figures
Use the three scenario sections. Full minutes per order = handling minutes plus rework minutes per order; each correction takes 20 minutes, so rework per order = corrections per 100 x 20 / 100. Work each figure before you reveal the values and the working.
| Figure | Inputs and rule | Value | Working |
|---|---|---|---|
| Team A full minutes per order, baseline and pilot | Table 1: (staff hours x 60 + rework minutes) / orders submitted | ? | ? |
| Team B full minutes per order, baseline and pilot | Table 1, same rule | ? | ? |
| Net minutes saved per order compared with Team B, all channels | Team A's change minus Team B's change | ? | ? |
| Net minutes saved per typed email order | Tables 2 and 3, with rework per order added to handling | ? | ? |
| Net minutes saved per PDF order | Same | ? | ? |
| Net minutes saved per fax order | Same | ? | ? |
| Orders corrected after submission per 100 orders | Tables 1 and 3 | ? | ? |
| Escalations per 100 orders | Table 1 | ? | ? |
| Monthly net hours saved, Team A, all channels | 5,200 orders a month per team: 2,600 email, 2,080 PDF, 520 fax | ? | ? |
| Monthly net hours saved, whole desk, email and PDF only, if Team B matches Team A | Per team 2,600 email and 2,080 PDF orders a month | ? | ? |
| Drafts with at least one wrong field per 100, all channels | Audit table, each channel weighted by its share of orders (50%, 40%, 10%) | ? | ? |
| Drafts with at least one wrong field per 100, email and PDF only | Weights 50 and 40 out of 90 | ? | ? |
| Most frequent wrong field, weighted, all channels | Audit table field columns, same weights | ? | ? |
| Documents charged per order in the pilot, and the cost of the mail-rule days | Documents charged, the mail-rule days, Team A orders submitted | ? | ? |
Diagnose
Reconcile the vendor's figure
Vendor A's pilot dashboard reads: "7,200 drafts created. Time saved: 960 hours (8 minutes per draft, the default setting)." The account manager suggests finance use this figure, doubled for the whole desk, in the business case. Check it against the pilot results, the draft audit, and the cost sheet.
- Show how the 960 hours is built.
- List what the figure leaves out or assumes, and the pilot figure that corrects each point.
- Say which time-saved figure you would give finance, for the pilot and per month, and how much of it is cash.
Predict the outcome
Compare scopes
Use the cost sheet, finance's rules, and the per-channel savings and correction rates from the pilot figures. Rows 1 to 3 assume every team using the tool gets Team A's measured savings and correction rates per channel; row 4 is row 3's scope with Team B saving no time. Count one charged document per AI-read order, and cost per order = total monthly cost / AI-read orders. Work each hidden value before you reveal it.
| Scope | AI-read orders a month | Net hours saved a month | Value of hours | Total monthly cost | Cost per order | Net monthly benefit | Payback |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Team A only, all channels | 5,200 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |
| Whole desk, all channels | 10,400 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |
| Whole desk, email and PDF only (faxes keyed by hand) | 9,360 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |
| Whole desk, email and PDF only, if Team B saves no time | 9,360 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |
Kept in this browser. Saving your score below keeps a copy with it.
0 / 5000
4
Step 4: Reference answer
5
Step 5: Score yourself
Score each dimension 0, 1, or 2, then save the score to your history. Readiness thresholds are editorial estimates.
Grades your written answer against this rubric with your own AI provider key from Settings. It is a second opinion: the score you save is still yours.
What earns a 2: Puts every period on the same per-order basis, subtracts the comparison team's change from the pilot team's overall and for each channel, checks the baseline weeks moved in parallel, reconciles the vendor's time-saved figure to the measured one, and says what volunteer selection leaves uncertain.
What earns a 2: Adds platform, usage, one-time, owner, audit, and IT costs plus rework (through minutes per order) and the cost of extra corrections, and values freed hours only where they remove a real cost.
What earns a 2: Reads corrections after submission and the audit sample by channel and field, weights the sample by real order shares, and flags counts too small to compare.
What earns a 2: Shows numerators, denominators, and units for minutes per order, rates per 100, monthly hours, cost per order, and payback, and checks totals against their parts.
What earns a 2: Chooses expand, fix, or stop, sets the scope for each order channel from its time and quality figures, and gives an owner, conditions, a budget cap and spend alert, a stop rule tied to measured figures, and a review date.
0 of 10 · Scored 0 of 5 dimensions
Ready at 8 of 10, with no 0 in Full cost and value or Recommendation and controls
Kept in this browser until you sign up, then it moves to your account.
Mark this level complete when you can rebuild the net time saved, the quality read-out, and each scope's monthly cost and payback from the scenario figures, and defend a recommendation with its controls and review date.
Your saved scores
Practice saves and mock interview answers on this question, newest first.
No saved scores yet. Score every dimension, then save.
6
Step 6: Follow-up questions
An interviewer may ask these next.
Why can a before-and-after on the pilot team alone mislead?
What does a comparison team not fix when the pilot team were volunteers?
Why weight an audit sample by order share when one channel was oversampled?
When does a freed staff hour count as money in a business case?
Why is cost per order alone a weak way to compare two scopes?
7
