| name | aipom-use-case-triage |
| description | Compare AI opportunities across outcome value, evidence, feasibility, responsibility, readiness, and reversibility to recommend explore, validate, defer, or reject. |
| type | interactive |
| category | portfolio-and-investment-choices |
| phase | 2 |
| status | active |
| operating_level | ["portfolio","product-team","initiative"] |
| audience | ["CPO","VP Product","Product Operations","Product Manager","Team Lead","Engineering","Finance","AI Governance"] |
| best_for | ["Comparing an intake of AI ideas","Preventing enthusiasm-only prioritization","Choosing bounded discovery investments"] |
| evidence_required | ["Comparable opportunity frames","Outcome and value assumptions","Feasibility and readiness evidence","Consequences and constraints"] |
| produces | ["Comparable triage record","Posture recommendation for each use case","Portfolio-level gaps and next tests"] |
| assessment_questions | ["POR-01","POR-02","POR-03","STR-04"] |
| maturity_move | {"from":"emerging","to":"repeatable"} |
| estimated_time | 45-90 min |
| group_size | 3-10 |
| depends_on | ["aipom-opportunity-framing","aipom-outcome-value-map"] |
| combine_with | ["aipom-bet-charter","aipom-investment-stage-gates","aipom-portfolio-posture-advisor"] |
| sources | [] |
AIPOM Use-Case Triage
What Is It
An adaptive comparison method for deciding which AI opportunities deserve exploration, validation, deferral, or rejection. It preserves evidence quality and critical constraints instead of disguising judgment in a single weighted score.
Why Use It
Idea funnels reward confident storytelling and false precision. Triage makes alternatives comparable while preventing strong value claims from averaging away unsafe behavior, unavailable data, or missing ownership.
When to Use It
Use for intake, portfolio shaping, innovation funds, or before creating detailed bet charters. Do not use it to decide scale; later-stage evidence belongs in investment gates.
What It Produces
- Comparable opportunity records and confidence notes
- Explore, validate, defer, or reject recommendation per use case
- Non-negotiable constraints and portfolio dependencies
- Next test, owner, decision rule, and review date
Who Should Participate
Include the portfolio decision owner, Product Operations, product and technology representatives, finance, and governance partners. Invite opportunity owners to clarify evidence, not set their own criteria.
Evidence to Bring
Bring opportunity frames, outcome maps, alternatives, user evidence, feasibility signals, data and context readiness, evaluation needs, governance consequences, adoption constraints, costs, and reversibility.
How to Do It
- Extract supplied context and normalize each opportunity to a comparable scope. For a single proposal, compare it with the current workflow, a non-AI alternative, or the decision to do nothing.
- Confirm the portfolio decision, constraints, capacity, and non-negotiables.
- Examine outcome value, evidence strength, AI fit, feasibility, responsibility, readiness, and reversibility.
- Record missing perspectives, disagreements, and evidence confidence.
- Apply critical constraints before comparing relative attractiveness.
- Present posture options and recommend a default with reasons.
- Define the smallest evidence-producing action for opportunities that proceed.
- Record the owner, decision rule, exceptions, and next review.
Triage determines the next investment posture; it does not establish launch or scale readiness. Route a selected opportunity to a bet charter, investment gate, or initiative-readiness review appropriate to the next decision.
Facilitation Protocol
Support guided, context-dump, and best-guess modes. In guided mode ask first which decision and capacity constraint govern the comparison. In context-dump mode extract existing answers before asking gaps. In best-guess mode label assumptions and avoid turning incomplete information into numeric certainty.
