Seventeen recognitions. About six minutes. One honest position — on two axes most institutions never separate: whether you are asking the right question about AI, and whether your organisation could deliver on the answer.
Every question describes four realities you can observe — pick the one that sounds most like home. There are no points for ambition: scoring follows the published evidence on what actually produces results. Nothing here needs research, and the reading is yours to keep — no registration, no gate.
Scoring follows the published evidence on what produces results — not what sounds most ambitious. Several confident-sounding paths are, on the record, where value stalls.
One more honest note: one reading from one seat is perception, not audit — and that is itself useful. The sharper instrument: have each member of your leadership team take this separately, and compare. Where the answers diverge is usually where the first real conversation is.
Entirely optional, and anonymous. Share your sector and size, and as readings accumulate, this is where you'll see how institutions like yours are positioned. Nothing identifying is kept.
This reading covers two of the seven dimensions of the decision. The full structure — technology, investment, ambition, risk and liability, ownership, people, readiness — is reasoned through in Issue Two of the Letter, and the board-level scan from that letter is a printable question set. For a board or executive team, the Senior Team Briefing runs the conversation live; the session is complimentary.