World Model Readiness What goes to AI, what stays human

Module · What goes to AI, what stays human

The Manager's AI Check

A manager's core act is delegation, and AI just added a second place to delegate to. Get the split right and you free your people for work that grows them; get it wrong and you either waste them on grind or quietly hollow out the judgment they need to develop. This module checks how you decide what goes to AI versus a person, how hard you review what comes back, and whether you are protecting your team's growth while you automate the busywork.

Question 1 of 5 · You know what goes where

Do you have clear reasons for sending work to AI versus to a person?

Delegating to AI purely because it is faster or cheaper ignores what the work does for the person who would have done it. Good criteria weigh the outcome and the development, not just the speed, and they hold up when you have to explain them.

Question 2 of 5 · You review AI-assisted work

When your team ships AI-assisted work, do you review it as closely as the rest?

AI output arrives polished, which makes it easy to wave through on presentation alone. But fluent and correct are different things, and the accountability for what ships is still yours, not the tool's.

Question 3 of 5 · You protect their growth

Are you making sure your people still build judgment AI could shortcut for them?

The hard, slow tasks are often where judgment gets built, and they are exactly the ones AI offers to remove. Hand all of them to the tool and your people ship faster today while getting weaker underneath, until the day they need judgment they never grew.

Question 4 of 5 · You automate the busywork

Have you cut the meetings and reports AI can now handle for your team?

Status updates, summaries, notes and routine reporting are exactly the low-judgment load AI now absorbs well. Every hour of it you leave in place is an hour your team does not spend on the work that actually needs them.

Question 5 of 5 · Your team has norms

Does your team have shared norms for how and when to use AI?

Without shared norms, everyone invents their own line: some overuse the tools and hide it, others avoid them and fall behind. Norms make the expectations explicit, so people can use AI openly and consistently instead of guessing what is allowed.

For the statistics · one click each

Three questions for the public picture

These do not affect your score. They feed the anonymised, aggregated statistics; groups under 8 respondents are never shown.

What decides whether a task goes to AI or a person on your team?

Whatever is fastest
Whatever is cheapest
Case by case gut
Explicit criteria
Not sure

How closely do you review your team's AI-assisted output?

Barely at all
A quick skim
Spot checks
Full review
They use none

Does your team have agreed rules for using AI?

None
Informal habits
Being drafted
Agreed and shared
Does not apply

Your context

Used to calibrate the report. Company size and sector remain in the anonymized dataset; your email does not.