Choose your first automation candidate
Compare a few repeated tasks and choose one bounded, low-risk pilot with an owner, a baseline and clear stop conditions, or decide to wait.
The result
You start with one task where mistakes are cheap to catch, and you can tell whether the change helped.
Why it may matter
First automations that touch customers, money or messy processes tend to create review work and risk. A small, measured pilot builds evidence and confidence before anything bigger.
Done when
One candidate is chosen, or deliberately postponed, with an owner, a baseline, pass and fail criteria and a manual fallback written down.
A suggestion. Set your own finish line.You will leave with a pilot decision record
This is what you produce. The result at the top of the page is what it is for. These fields carry into the next guides:
- Candidate task
candidate - Reviewer
reviewer - Baseline
baseline - Pass and fail criteria
passFail - Stop and fallback
fallback
Before you start
Bring:
- A mapped or clearly described process
- How often each task happens
- Your own observations of time and errors
- How sensitive the data involved is
- Systems you already use
Tools: A chat AI tool that accepts pasted text; Optional later: an automation tool your organisation has approved. No named products are recommended here; tools you already use are often enough. If you need to look further, see Useful external links.
Steps
List three repeated tasks
AI can helpSuggests tasks from your process map that are frequent and well defined.You decidePick three real candidates.Output: Candidate list
Assess volume, stability and exceptions
AI can helpBuilds a comparison table and writes "unknown" where you have no evidence.You decideFill in what you have observed, not what you expect.Output: Comparison table
Choose a low-consequence candidate
AI can helpPoints out candidates that touch customers, money or personal data.You decideChoose the one where a wrong output is easy to catch and cheap to fix.Output: Chosen candidate
Estimate the full cost of review and setup
AI can helpLists cost and effort questions. It does not produce savings figures.You decideEstimate setup, review time and subscription costs from your own situation.Output: Cost questions answered
Define acceptable results
AI can helpDrafts pass and fail criteria from your description.You decideSet criteria the reviewer can actually apply.Output: Pass and fail criteria
Name the owner and fallback
No AI neededThis step is for people.You decideName who owns the pilot, who reviews outputs and how you go back to manual.Output: Owner and fallback
Run a manual or sandboxed trial first
AI can helpProduces drafts from copied, approved sample data.You decideCompare outputs with your baseline before connecting any system.Output: Trial results
Prompt to copy
Paste it into the AI tool you use, replace the parts in square brackets, and read the result before you use any of it.
Compare [three tasks] as first automation candidates using frequency, business value, process stability, data sensitivity, exception rate, review effort and integration complexity. Use "unknown" when evidence is absent. Recommend a bounded pilot or recommend postponing automation. Include a non-AI option, representative test cases, human approval points, failure conditions, fallback and a baseline measurement plan. Do not claim savings without measurements.
Template: Pilot decision record
| Candidate | Trigger | Input | Current effort | Frequency | Proposed assistance | Output | Reviewer | Exceptions | Data boundary | Cost questions | Baseline | Pass or fail | Stop and fallback |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Decision: pilot / postpone
Owner: ______ Review date: ______
Non-AI option considered: ______
Check before you use it
If any of these fail, the output is still a draft.
- The task has a stable, clear finish condition.
- Representative real examples exist for testing.
- Reviewing outputs is affordable in time.
- Wrong outputs can be caught and corrected before they reach anyone outside the team.
Common mistakes
- Starting with the most visible task instead of the safest one.
- Counting time saved without counting review time.
- Connecting live systems before a manual trial.
Working alone
Protect time for setup and review. A pilot that you have no time to check is not a pilot.
Working as a team
Name an operational owner and a separate reviewer, and agree how either of them can stop the pilot.
Where this guide stops
This guide helps you choose and frame a pilot. It does not estimate return on investment, and it does not assess legal duties for AI systems, which depend on your country, sector and use. If a candidate affects customers' rights, employees, health, credit or legal decisions, get specialist advice before testing.
Data care
- Run the trial on copied, approved sample data, not live customer records.
- Keep personal and financial data out of the first pilot.
Stop and rethink if
- Stop if review takes longer than doing the task manually.
- Stop if any wrong output reaches a customer.
Measure it: comparable-case results
For comparable cases: total time including review, share of outputs accepted, and errors found. Time recovered is not automatically money saved.
Baseline first. Measure the task manually for a few weeks before the trial, including any rework.
Use this next
Plan your next step
A short worksheet: result, why it matters to you, baseline, finish line, first action, owner, review date, AI role and human check. Suggestions from this guide are included to get you started.
Help improve this draft
This guide is part of the pilot. Tell us what was useful, what was unclear and what is missing. Your feedback shapes the next version.
Opens your own email app. Nothing is sent until you press send there.
Want help adapting this to your business?
A conversation can help when the guide shows a bigger problem than one template can solve.