|
— Executive Data & AI Brief
There Are Four Ways to Source AI Innovation.
Most Leaders Are Over-Indexing on Two.
Four perspectives. One complete picture of where AI creates value.
|
| Issue #3 · 2026 |
5-Minute Read |
|
|
● 1 — The Signal
As Data & AI embed in the organisation, the emerging leadership question is: where should we look for meaningful value?
Most organisations rely on whatever surfaces through internal idea boards, departmental proposals, technology teams, or transformation programmes. These channels are not wrong — but they tend to be inward-looking and incomplete.
A more deliberate approach recognises that AI value consistently emerges from four distinct perspectives. Each asks a different question about where Data & AI can change outcomes, drawing on different data, different stakeholders, and different mechanisms of value creation.
|
|
Lens 1
Outside-In
What opportunities exist outside the organisation — and how can AI transform them?
Surfaces external realities that internal assumptions miss.
Customer behaviour
Ecosystem & partners
Competitors
Market timing
|
|
Lens 2
Inside-Out
What is our own data and institutional knowledge already telling us — that we haven't yet acted on?
Surfaces where the organisation's own data is underused or misread.
Performance gaps
Asset utilisation
Internal risk signals
|
| |
|
Lens 3
Process
Which high-value processes would benefit from being data-driven or more intelligent?
Surfaces opportunities to rethink processes in the light of new AI capabilities.
Workflow automation
Process scaling
Scheduling
Compliance checks
|
|
Lens 4
Decision-Making
Which consequential judgements would improve with Data & AI support?
Surfaces where AI can improve the quality of human judgement, not just the speed of execution.
Risk assessments
Pricing & allocation
Escalation triggers
Investment prioritisation
|
|
|
These perspectives are not stages or a maturity ladder. They operate simultaneously. The most resilient AI portfolios balance across all four — working together to fit strategically.
|
|
|
● 2 — Why This Matters
Without structure, AI portfolios default to what is easiest to justify — not what creates the greatest advantage
This is a prioritisation bias, not a capability gap. The strongest and most resilient advantage emerges when leaders examine all four perspectives together. Competitive impact rarely sits in a single lens — it sits in the interaction between market reality, internal truth, scalable execution, and decision quality.
|
| Perspective |
|
Value it unlocks |
|
Outside-In
|
|
Market relevance, customer centricity, competitive positioning |
|
Inside-Out
|
|
Productivity, cost discipline, better asset use |
|
Process
|
|
Scale, consistency, margin improvement |
|
Decision-Making
|
|
Judgement quality, capital allocation, risk calibration |
|
| |
When leaders consider all four perspectives together, value creation becomes broader, more durable, and significantly harder to replicate.
|
|
|
Growth, efficiency, resilience, and decision quality reinforce one another — expanding the organisation's value surface area and strengthening both competitive performance and defensibility.
|
|
|
● 3 — Executive Implications
Four structural advantages that a deliberate sourcing approach creates
| 1 |
Enterprise alignment
Each lens activates a different part of the enterprise — customer, operations, finance, strategy — turning AI from a technology initiative into a coordinated value engine.
|
| 2 |
Portfolio resilience
Balancing across all four perspectives spreads value across growth, margin, resilience, and decision quality — reducing the concentration risk that comes from over-indexing on a single lens.
|
| 3 |
Strategic clarity
A structured portfolio makes explicit how AI strengthens competitive positioning and long-term performance — in language boards and investors can assess.
|
| 4 |
Disciplined capital deployment
Each lens sharpens where capital, data, and leadership attention should be focused for measurable impact — before commitments are made, not after.
|
|
|
|
● 4 — Recommended Actions — 90-Day Horizon
Introducing the framework without disrupting what is already in motion
| |
Map all current AI initiatives to the four perspectives. This is a visibility exercise, not a critique — the goal is to understand the shape of the portfolio before making decisions about it. |
| |
Use all four perspectives as structured prompts in the next AI planning session. The questions each lens asks will surface opportunities that standard business case processes do not. |
| |
Identify which perspectives have named business sponsors and which default to technology ownership. Address underrepresented lenses before the next investment cycle. |
| |
For every Decision-Making initiative, confirm both the expected value — capital efficiency, risk reduction, pricing lift — and clear accountability, before funding is approved. |
These are framing and facilitation steps. No new infrastructure or tooling required.
|
|
|
● 5 — Board Talking Points
Safe to use verbatim
“We are intentionally sourcing AI initiatives across four perspectives — not just pursuing isolated use cases.”
“Our portfolio is balanced across customer relevance, operational performance, and decision quality.”
“This framework connects AI activity to competitive positioning and long-term performance.”
“We are making explicit choices about where AI should — and should not — influence outcomes.”
“We can demonstrate where AI is improving execution and where it is shaping consequential decisions.”
|
|
Where leaders look for AI value shapes what they build.
This framework does not prescribe priority. It ensures that prioritisation is deliberate — with ownership clear before value is pursued.
|
| Executive Data & AI Brief |
Issue #3 · re-data.ai/newsletter |
|