Focused guide
Une page pour calculer le ROI IA sur le flux complet, avec qualité, reprise, risque et décisions d’owner.
Mesurer le workflow, pas le modèle.
Une page pour calculer le ROI IA sur le flux complet, avec qualité, reprise, risque et décisions d’owner.
AI workflow ROI measures the complete operating loop, not the model or prompt in isolation. The workflow includes intake, preparation, generation, review, correction, validation, delivery, and rework. Local speed only counts when the whole cycle improves without hiding quality or risk debt.
Start with the pre-AI workflow baseline: volume, cycle time, error rate, escalation rate, rework, people involved, and decision owner. Then measure the same workflow after AI, including the new tasks AI creates. A faster draft with slower review is not automatically ROI.
The baseline should cover the real flow, not only the visible object. Record volume, frequency, cost, quality, data touched, people involved, and expected decision. Without that base, the topic remains an impression and the page cannot produce a decision.
Good signals are observable in daily work. They do not require a complete monitoring platform to start, but they must be specific enough to tie the topic to risk, cost, or value opportunity.
The full cost combines licenses, APIs, integration, training, prompt maintenance, data preparation, human review, corrections, escalations, and monitoring. The value side should include recovered capacity, errors avoided, faster turnaround, risk avoided, or revenue influence only when the link is defensible.
The question is therefore not only how much it costs. It is also what quality leaves the workflow, how much human rework remains necessary, what risk remains, and what value is genuinely protected or created.
The control is a workflow decision sheet. It should state baseline, AI-assisted cycle, cost, quality threshold, remaining risk, and useful redeployment of time. This turns ROI from a feeling into a repeatable decision tool.
The control should be simple enough for teams to follow and precise enough to change a decision. A good control names owner, threshold, evidence, exception, and next action. If it never changes budget or behavior, it remains decorative.
Positive ROI can still be fragile if quality depends on heroic reviewers. Negative ROI can still be worth fixing if the workflow is strategic and the bottleneck is addressable. The decision should be stop, fix, scale, or measure longer, not simply good or bad.
The sheet should fit on one page before appendices. It gives leadership the scope, evidence, assumptions, remaining risk, and recommendation. The expected result is not a more nuanced opinion, but a traceable decision.
The mistake is calculating ROI from minutes saved in a demo. Demos ignore queues, exceptions, edge cases, policy limits, and review behavior. Workflow ROI forces those realities into the calculation before budget grows.
The best antidote is returning to the concrete workflow. Who does what, with which data, what cost, what quality, what risk, and what decision? That question makes even an abstract topic operational enough to act on.
FAQ
Only when the time is actually redeployed, removes cost, increases capacity, or shortens an important delay.
Quality can be value when errors, rework, risk, or customer harm decrease.
Narrow enough to measure before and after with the same unit of work.
Focused guide