Runwork
All Use Cases

Evidence for the board

Asked how it is going, and all you have is a story

You can see adoption per person, what is running across the workspace, and savings with confirmed and estimated kept apart. All of it from work that actually happened.

Powered By

Savings
Adoption & Training Team Dashboard
Throughput
Continuity
Workflows

The Challenge

  • You are asked whether it is working and the honest answer is three anecdotes
  • Seat counts and token spend are the only numbers anyone can produce, and neither one is a result
  • Every team reports that it is going well. You have no way to tell which ones mean it
  • The pilots that impressed everybody in March are not running in September
  • You are defending a budget line with a story about how much people seem to like it

The Runwork Solution

  • Each person is scored across 4 dimensions, so "it is going well" becomes something you can check rather than something you are told
  • What is running across the workspace is a list you open, rather than a survey you send and wait for
  • Savings keep confirmed and estimated apart and never add them together, so the figure you present is the one somebody checked
  • Reports are produced the same way every time, with no AI in the calculation, so the same inputs give the same output
  • Every report carries a section on what failed and what is missing, which is the part a sceptical audience reads first

What your team gets

The board question, answered from a page

What did the AI budget produce this year. You open the report rather than assembling one, and the number you read out is the confirmed one.

A figure that holds up under a follow-up

Confirmed and estimated sit in separate columns and are never blended. The number is smaller than the one you would like, and it is still standing after somebody asks how it was calculated.

Which teams actually took it up

Adoption is scored per person across setup, usage, building and knowledge, so a team that is set up but building nothing looks different from a team that never started.

What is running today

Not which demo went well in March. The workflows, scheduled work and agents running right now are a list, and it is open to anybody in the workspace rather than only to you.

A report you forward

Written to be sent to somebody else, so you attach it instead of rebuilding it as slides the night before.

Where the numbers stop

There are no comparisons against other companies anywhere in this, and we do not plan to add any. What you can compare is this period against your own last one.

A Day in the Life

Monday. The email you knew was coming. The board wants a view on the AI programme before the quarter closes. Previously that meant a week of asking every team how it was going and believing the answers.

Tuesday. The confirmed column. You open the savings report and take the checked figure rather than the blended one. It is smaller. It is also the one that will not fall over when the CFO asks where it came from.

Wednesday. Two teams that are not what they said. Adoption scored per person shows one team fully set up and building nothing, and another that never connected. Those are two different problems and until now they were the same sentence in a status update.

Thursday. What is actually running. You open the list of workflows and scheduled work that ran this month. It is the difference between a programme and a set of demonstrations, and nobody had to compile it.

Friday. The part you do not skip. Every report carries a section on what failed and what is missing. You put it in the deck rather than leaving it out, because the audience that matters will look for it and finding it there is worth more than the headline number.

And none of it was assembled for the meeting. The evidence existed before anybody asked, which is the only kind that holds up when somebody asks a second question.

Frequently Asked Questions

What can I actually put in front of a board?
The confirmed savings figure with our own cost subtracted beside it, adoption scored per person, what has been running and how reliably, and the section on what failed. The reports are built to be forwarded and produced the same way every time, so the same inputs give the same output no matter who runs them or when.
How is this different from counting seats and token spend?
Seats tell you what you bought and tokens tell you that something happened. Neither tells you whether anything changed. These numbers come from runs that happened in your workspace and from what your people actually built, which is a different question and the one you are being asked.
Can I compare us against other companies?
No. There are no cross-company benchmarks here and we do not intend to add any: it would mean comparing your work to other people's under assumptions nobody has agreed on, and the resulting number would be the least defensible thing on the page. What you can compare is this period against your own last one.
Who can open the reports?
Workspace owners and admins. The reports sit inside the team dashboard, which is admin-gated, so this is a view for people accountable for the programme rather than something everyone browses. What is not gated is the list of what is running: workflows, scheduled work, endpoints and agents are open to any member.
What happens when the numbers are worse than I hoped?
You see that before your board does, which is the entire value of the thing. Every report has a mandatory section on failures, gaps and exceptions, so a bad quarter shows up as a bad quarter rather than as a good headline with the difficult part left out. A report you cannot lose with is a report nobody believes.

Related Use Cases

What the Money Bought What AI Does Who Uses AI

Start keeping what your team figures out.

Start a 14-day free trial. No credit card required.

Start Free Trial Explore More Use Cases