Cost at the unit · the price of the next point
Autonomy economics
The estate runs at 71.4% touchless. more
What the next point is worth, by verdict
Over the 78 sub-functions whose published cost pair can be decomposed. more
A build is called worth doing where the modeled build cost pays back inside twenty-six weeks, marginal where it pays back inside seventy-eight, and not worth doing beyond that or where the machine costs more to run than the person it replaces. At its ceiling means the sub-function has already reached the autonomy limit it set for itself, so there is no next point to buy without moving the ceiling first.
The twelve fastest to pay for themselves
Ranked by payback. Every row is one percentage point of that sub-function's own weekly volume, not one point of the estate.
| Sub-function | Now → ceiling | Units a point | Person / machine | Net a week | Build | Payback |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Field Service Dispatch Customer Service | 75% → 86% 11 points | 149 | $49.84 / $7.25 | $5,347 less $999 to run | $36k | 6.8 weeks Build it |
Supply Planning Supply Chain | 75% → 84% 9 points | 156 | $47.00 / $6.76 | $5,886 less $391 to run | $56k | 9.5 weeks Build it |
Code Review & Quality Engineering | 82% → 88% 6 points | 96 | $47.08 / $7.34 | $3,584 less $231 to run | $39k | 10.9 weeks Build it |
Learning & Development Human Resources | 73% → 82% 9 points | 178 | $51.63 / $7.25 | $6,790 less $1,111 to run | $74k | 10.9 weeks Build it |
O2C Control Tower AI GBS & Global Business Services | 84% → 92% 8 points | 230 | $35.47 / $4.86 | $6,672 less $368 to run | $73k | 10.9 weeks Build it |
Campaign Orchestration Marketing | 78% → 86% 8 points | 184 | $29.03 / $6.36 | $3,731 less $440 to run | $41k | 10.9 weeks Build it |
S2P Control Tower AI GBS & Global Business Services | 85% → 93% 8 points | 204 | $26.89 / $4.05 | $4,234 less $424 to run | $48k | 11.3 weeks Build it |
R2R Control Tower AI GBS & Global Business Services | 79% → 89% 10 points | 197 | $37.04 / $6.57 | $5,367 less $635 to run | $61k | 11.4 weeks Build it |
H2R Control Tower AI GBS & Global Business Services | 78% → 91% 13 points | 255 | $26.00 / $1.91 | $5,501 less $642 to run | $64k | 11.7 weeks Build it |
Demand Generation Marketing | 80% → 88% 8 points | 93 | $51.87 / $8.68 | $3,573 less $444 to run | $43k | 12.2 weeks Build it |
Warehouse & Fulfillment Supply Chain | 84% → 88% 4 points | 183 | $33.05 / $2.80 | $5,212 less $324 to run | $64k | 12.3 weeks Build it |
Data Science & Modeling Research & Development | 75% → 83% 8 points | 150 | $45.54 / $3.63 | $5,594 less $692 to run | $69k | 12.4 weeks Build it |
Where the headroom sits
Net weekly return of one point, summed over the sub-functions of each function that still have room.
76 sub-functions publish a pair that cannot be decomposed
Shown, and held out of every headline on this page.
What holds a ceiling down
Each sub-function states in prose why it will not go further. more
This sorting is keyword matching over the rationale each sub-function wrote, not a maintained taxonomy, and it shows: risk appetite absorbs 68% of the estate because it is where anything unmatched lands. The distinction matters for who can lift the ceiling — a regulator, a controller and a data owner are three different conversations — so the sorting is worth doing properly and is not yet.
What an exception costs
The same service, priced two ways: chains that ran clean, and chains that raised at least one exception. more
| Service | Clean | With an exception | Multiple | Excess a week | Most common cause | Payback |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Requisition to receipt Measured | $19.26 316 chains · 24.7 h | $48.01 44 chains · 53.7 h | 2.49× | $63,259 $1,265 in the sample | S2P-CAT · 22 The dominant code is S2P-CAT, on 22 of the 44 sampled chains that raised anything at all. | 2.5 weeks $94k to build |
Invoice to payment Measured | $23.52 251 chains · 40.2 h | $61.38 49 chains · 95.9 h | 2.61× | $92,755 $1,855 in the sample | R2R-UNR · 20 The dominant code is R2R-UNR, on 20 of the 49 sampled chains that raised anything at all. | 2.4 weeks $132k to build |
Order to cash Too few exception chains to measure | $12.91 187 chains · 7.2 h | $45.12 13 chains · 26.4 h | 3.49× | — $20,936 if the mean held | O2C-ATP · 4 The dominant code is O2C-ATP, on 4 of the 13 sampled chains that raised anything at all. | — not costed |
Deduction to settlement Too few exception chains to measure | $11.68 153 chains · 28.7 h | $55.27 17 chains · 209.3 h | 4.73× | — $37,047 if the mean held | O2C-PRF · 7 The dominant code is O2C-PRF, on 7 of the 17 sampled chains that raised anything at all. | — not costed |
Hire to productive Measured | $26.57 148 chains · 89.9 h | $52.45 42 chains · 137.3 h | 1.97× | $54,350 $1,087 in the sample | H2R-CTR · 12 The dominant code is H2R-CTR, on 12 of the 42 sampled chains that raised anything at all. | 5.4 weeks $176k to build |
Close to report Measured | $55.48 98 chains · 85.0 h | $95.79 67 chains · 127.5 h | 1.73× | $135,051 $2,701 in the sample | R2R-EST · 19 The dominant code is R2R-EST, on 19 of the 67 sampled chains that raised anything at all. | 1.5 weeks $125k to build |
Query to resolution Measured | $23.29 161 chains · 60.1 h | $59.53 49 chains · 97.6 h | 2.56× | $88,786 $1,776 in the sample | ITS-P1E · 13 The dominant code is ITS-P1E, on 13 of the 49 sampled chains that raised anything at all. | 1.7 weeks $91k to build |
Concept to shelf Measured | $54.09 115 chains · 139.1 h | $85.13 40 chains · 264.2 h | 1.57× | $62,080 $1,242 in the sample | C2L-SPC · 11 The dominant code is C2L-SPC, on 11 of the 40 sampled chains that raised anything at all. | 2.7 weeks $101k to build |
The widest gap in the sample is Deduction to settlement at 4.73 times, and it is one of the 2 services with too few exception chains to call it a measurement: it raised 17 against a floor of twenty. The widest gap that can be measured is Invoice to payment at 2.61 times, on 49 exception chains against 251 clean ones. The most expensive is Close to report at $135,051 a week of avoidable cost, and it is also the fastest to build against, at 1.5 weeks on a modeled build of $125k. The candidate on every measured row is named, so the argument is about one agent and one code rather than about exceptions in general.
A clean chain and an exception chain of the same service are priced with the same rate card, so the multiple between them is a difference in the work, not in the pricing. more
What has already been banked against what is left to buy
The estate has taken a large amount of cost out of its own run rate. more
The twelve towers publish a cost before and a cost now. Priced against this week’s volume that is $27.9m falling to $9.1m, a reduction of 67.5%. It is a modeled pair on the tower records, not a general ledger movement, and nothing on this page adds to it.
67 of 78 decomposable sub-functions carry a verdict worth acting on. They save $207k a week and add $22k of running cost, on a modeled build of $4.0m that pays back in 21.7 weeks. The other 6 say do not build, 5 are at their ceiling and 76 publish a cost pair that cannot be split at all.
The two numbers are not the same kind of claim and the gap between them is the honest headline of this page. The banked figure is retrospective and modeled; it is what the tower records assert has already happened. The forward figure is the only one anybody can still decide about, and at 0.98% of the banked amount it says the estate is close to the end of what this generation of automation can buy — not at the start of it. Anyone presenting the two together should say which one they are asking to be credited for. Annualized figures are the weekly figure multiplied by fifty two. They carry no seasonality, no holiday effect and no growth. The modeled year the ledger holds runs 2.3 percent above the published week, so a fifty two week multiplication is a slight understatement of the modeled year rather than an overstatement.
Actions
What is waiting on a person
Each count below is a sub-function whose next point of touchless has a price and a return, or a service where the exception path costs a multiple of the clean one. more
Correct a published cost pair that cannot be decomposed
The cost before and after automation these sub-functions publish implies an automated unit cheaper than the model call it makes. more
Fund the next point of touchless where it pays back inside two quarters
Each of these returns its build cost in 26 weeks or less on the sub-function’s own published unit economics.
Put an agent on the exception path of a measured service
The fastest is Close to report, 1.5 weeks against a modeled build of $125k.
Retire a ceiling that no longer earns its place
The next point of touchless costs more than it saves here, or pays back beyond 78 weeks. more
Sample more chains before pricing an exception path
Fewer than twenty chains of one kind in the sampled week, so the multiple on the row is a curiosity rather than a measurement. more
Operations
What this desk is allowed to start
A surface that only reports is not operable. more
Trigger and bound
This page can price the next percentage point of touchless for every sub-function, separate the ones whose published economics can carry the arithmetic from the ones that cannot, and set the fully loaded cost of an exception path beside the clean path for the same service. more
Live observability
What the record shows right now
The next point of touchless for every sub-function whose published economics can be decomposed, an exhaustive partition of all 78 of them into 4 verdicts: each carries exactly one. more
Current distribution
78 sub-functions
Is policy and strategy coming to fruition
Whether the written intent is holding here
The next point of touchless across 73 sub-functions costs $4.5m to build and returns $188k a week net, a payback of 24 weeks.
Holding on the record
The position this layer exists to test is that autonomy should be bought a point at a time on evidence, not committed to as a program. more