Technical debt is the consequence of shortcuts, skipped steps and assumptions taken in building software to get it out the door. Technical debt is well understood and accepted.
And then there’s operational debt. The debt that builds up over time as a result of gaps in an operating model: a process that has no owner; an edge case that no one thinks through; an exception that’s handled manually. Operational debt is harder to quantify, manage, track, measure, understand. Which makes it easier to ignore. Which means many organizations don’t track it. Which means most don’t want to admit they have it. Which means that debt stays hidden and grows.
Many organizations have leaned on the efforts of their smartest employees to fill in the blanks and close gaps with personal effort and intellect. Enter agent-building, though. All of those processes have to be made explicit. Those gaps have to be filled. Those blanks have to be closed. Otherwise, the agents break on day one, in an embarrassing and expensive way. Except, of course, no one anticipates that’s going to happen. And yet, those gaps and blanks would’ve surfaced during diligence if any of those organizations had been acquired by someone else.
As a result, AI-enabled organizations will spend tons of money on AI and receive next-to-none back. And when the agents break, the post-mortem meeting will include lots of finger-pointing at the model vendor(s) and the technology. Technology failure. Not yours.