INNOVATION-VERSE
IT · Service Operations · Access Management
Access Management Requests
Role provisioning and revocation is ticket-driven with manual approval and configuration steps.
Innovation-Verse recommends
Simplify + Kaizen + RPA
No AI layer justifiedAutonomy L1 — GenerateRisk 3/5AAWI 52/100
FTE Capacity Release
0.6
Freed and redeployed
FTE Reduction
0.6
Defensible headcount removal
FTE Avoidance
0.3
Future hiring not required
Annual Benefit
$105K
Net $81K
Investment
$185K
Run cost $24K/yr
ROI
44%
Net benefit ÷ investment
Payback
27.5 mo
3-Year Value
$58K
Why
- Root cause: No role-based access model; Manual approval routing.
- Work profile: 92% repetitive, 20% judgment-dense, 10% exception rate, AAWI 52/100.
- Economics: $348K of current annual cost across 5.6 FTE of measured effort.
- Simplify — Step and handoff reduction on a fragmented, low-maturity flow.
- Kaizen — Incremental frontline gains; useful as a sustaining layer.
- RPA — Deterministic execution on stable, structured, repetitive steps.
Human role
Performs the decision; the system prepares the evidence
Why not the more complex options
- ✕GenAI — Work characteristics do not fit: unstructured knowledge work: drafting, summarising, interpreting. Fit score 16%.
- ✕Copilot — Work characteristics do not fit: investigation collapsed into a staged decision for human approval. Fit score 43%.
- ✕Agentic AI — ROI on autonomous operation is insufficient against implementation and run cost.
- ✕Multi-Agent — ROI on autonomous operation is insufficient against implementation and run cost.
- ✕Autonomous Workflow — ROI on autonomous operation is insufficient against implementation and run cost.
AI justification test
- ✓ High volume
- ✓ High repetition
- ✓ Structured data available
- ✓ Rules-based decisioning
- — High manual effort
- — High exception burden
- ✓ Sufficient process maturity
- ✓ Acceptable risk
- — Strong economic case
Expert reasoning · six analytical lenses, one recommendation
- — Root cause concentration: No role-based access model, Manual approval routing.
- — Value at stake is 30% of the current cost base.
- — Do not fund technology ahead of the process decision it depends on.
Root causes
Diagnosed before any technology is considered.
- 01No role-based access model
- 02Manual approval routing
- 03Fragmented target systems
Work activities
Atomic decomposition — effort share and judgment density.
Provision or revoke access8.0 min · judgment 20%
Work profile
Measured inputs behind every calculation.
FTE base5
Annual volume64,000
Minutes per transaction8
Annual manual hours9,429
Current FTE effort5.6
Current cost$348K
Cost per transaction$5.44
Rework cost$33K
Error / rework / exception5% · 8% · 10%
Geography · grade mixIndia GCC · 70% analyst / 25% senior / 5% lead
SystemsSAP S/4HANA, Ariba, ServiceNow
AI Addressable Work Index
Opportunity potential — not a recommendation.
52
AAWI
AI10%
Automation37%
Agentic24%
Human-essential29%
Repetition92
Rules dependence88
Structured data80
Knowledge intensity25
System accessibility70
Volume80
Human judgment20
Variability20
Risk60
Human accountability30
17-intervention spectrum
Every intervention scored against this work. Ranked by solution fit.
| Intervention | Fit | Benefit | Invest | ROI | Payback |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 RPA Digital · complexity 4/10 | 57 | $71K | $113K | 45% | 26.6 mo |
| 09 Digital / Workflow Digital · complexity 4/10 | 50 | $41K | $129K | 18% | 66.5 mo |
| 02 Simplify Operational · complexity 2/10 | 50 | $30K | $56K | 50% | 23.8 mo |
| 05 Kaizen Improvement · complexity 2/10 | 48 | $17K | $48K | 30% | 39.7 mo |
| 04 Lean Improvement · complexity 3/10 | 48 | $37K | $97K | 33% | 36.0 mo |
| 01 Eliminate Operational · complexity 1/10 | 46 | $18K | $32K | 54% | 22.2 mo |
| 03 Standardise Operational · complexity 2/10 | 45 | $30K | $89K | 29% | 41.6 mo |
| 11 OCR / IDP Digital · complexity 5/10 | 45 | $54K | $137K | 19% | 62.0 mo |
| 12 Analytics / ML Intelligence · complexity 5/10 | 44 | $37K | $137K | 11% | 109.9 mo |
| 06 Six Sigma Improvement · complexity 4/10 | 42 | $27K | $121K | 17% | 70.8 mo |
| 15 Agentic AI Agentic · complexity 8/10 | 39 | $99K | $258K | 12% | 97.5 mo |
| 07 Process Re-engineering Improvement · complexity 6/10 | 33 | $40K | $210K | 13% | 92.7 mo |
| 14 Copilot Intelligence · complexity 6/10 | 33 | $56K | $165K | 10% | 124.6 mo |
| 08 Operating Model / GBS Redesign Improvement · complexity 8/10 | 26 | $32K | $339K | 3% | 349.5 mo |
| 16 Multi-Agent Agentic · complexity 9/10 | 26 | $86K | $379K | -5% | n/a |
| 13 GenAI Intelligence · complexity 6/10 | 25 | $28K | $153K | -4% | n/a |
| 17 Autonomous Workflow Agentic · complexity 10/10 | 16 | $75K | $500K | -15% | n/a |
Minutes / transaction8
Exception rate10%
Rework rate8%
Cycle time3 days
Annual manual hours9,429
CharacterManual, fragmented, human-dependent
Minutes / transaction5.8
Exception rate8%
Rework rate4%
Cycle time1.5 days
Hours released2,573
CharacterStandardised, exception-driven, human-in-loop
Autonomy ceilingLevel 5
Recommended autonomyLevel 1 — Generate
Residual human effort29%
MonitoringContinuous with threshold alerting
Gate statusConstrained
CharacterAgentic within guardrails, not autonomous
FTE redeployment
Where should 0.6 FTE of released capacity go?
Analytics & Insight0.2 FTE
Business Partnering0.1 FTE
Controls & Risk0.1 FTE
Transformation0.1 FTE
Advisory0.1 FTE
Continuous Improvement0 FTE
Before — transactional FTE
5
100% transactional
After — transactional FTE
3.5
+ 0.6 FTE redeployed to strategic work
Change impact
Transform the work, not merely the headcount.
Roles impactedService Desk Analyst
Activities changing1 atomic activities
Skills requiredRole model design
Capacity released0.6 FTE
Training requirementRBAC enablement
Adoption riskLow
Leadership actions
- — Name a single accountable process owner for the end-to-end flow
- — Publish the redeployment commitment before deployment starts
- — Review adoption and exception trends in the monthly operating review
Governance & autonomy gate
No recommendation is issued that the gate does not permit.
Risk level3/5
Compliance sensitivity4/5
Data sensitivityRestricted
Human-in-loopApproval on every case
Approval pointPre-action
AuditabilityFull decision log with evidence trail
Escalation pathTeam lead → process owner → controller
Max permitted autonomyLevel 5
Gate findings
- ⚠ROI on autonomous operation is insufficient against implementation and run cost.
Control requirements
- — Confidence thresholds with mandatory human review below tolerance
- — Segregation of duties preserved between preparer and approver
- — Immutable action log retained for audit and SOX evidence
- — Kill-switch and rollback for every automated action class
Sequenced roadmap
Lowest complexity first. No layer skipped.
0–30 days · Simplify$30K
Step and handoff reduction on a fragmented, low-maturity flow.
30–60 days · Kaizen$17K
Incremental frontline gains; useful as a sustaining layer.
60–90 days · RPA$71K
Deterministic execution on stable, structured, repetitive steps.