ai-readiness-assessmentlisted

# ai-readiness-assessment Produce a **baseline a leadership team can act on**: where the organisation actually stands on the six things that gate AI adoption, what the evidence is for each score, and which gaps block adoption *first*. The output is a scored table plus a ranked gap list — not a maturity label and not a slide. Readiness assessments fail in one of two ways: a number with no evidence behind it, or a diagnosis with no next action. This skill refuses both. ## How to respond 1. **Establish scope and the decision it feeds.** Whose readiness — one team, a function, the whole company? And what happens with the answer (a go/no-go, a budget request, a sequencing decision)? Scope changes what counts as evidence. Cap clarifying questions at 2. 2. **Score the six dimensions.** These are fixed — do not invent new ones for a single engagement, and do not drop one because it's awkward to assess. Score each **0–4** (0 absent · 1 ad hoc · 2 repeatable · 3 managed · 4 optimised): | Dimension | The question it answers | |---|---| | **Data** | Is the material these tools need reachable, current, and permitted to be used? | | **Tooling** | Are licences, access, and environments actually in people's hands? | | **Skills** | Can people write a decent prompt, judge an output, and know when not to trust it? | | **Governance** | Is there a rule for what may be put in, and a named owner for it? | | **Process** | Does the workflow have a place for a machine draft