LLMEnterpriseAdoptionResearch

Impact Analysis: Organizational Scope Correction

Comparison of Single-User vs. Multi-Departmental Reality

Critical Corrections Made

Labor Cost Impact

Assumption Model	Staff Affected	Annual Labor Cost	Net Savings	Error Factor
Original (Single User)	1 person part-time	$1,087.50	$840	Baseline
Organizational Reality	40-120 people	$14,500-$26,100	$14,470-$26,070	17-31x higher

Implementation Complexity

Factor	Original Assumption	Organizational Reality	Impact
People to Train	1-5 users	80-120 staff members	16-24x more complex
Departments Involved	1 central team	40 departments/BUs	Requires enterprise change management
Timeline	6-12 weeks	12-18 months	2-3x longer implementation
Change Management	Departmental	Enterprise-wide	Cross-functional coordination required

Financial Analysis Revision

Metric	Original	Organizational Scale	Strategic Implication
Annual Savings	$840	$14,470-$26,070	Much stronger business case
Implementation Cost	$1,000-3,000	$38,630-$62,200	Higher upfront investment required
Break-even	2-3 months	25-37 months	Longer payback but higher absolute returns
3-Year Net Benefit	$2,500	$15,100-$65,000	6-26x higher long-term value

Strategic Decision Impact

Original Framework Decision

• Recommendation: “Approve pilot immediately based on minimal risk”
• Justification: Low cost ($30), quick payback (2-3 months), minimal complexity
• Risk Assessment: Very low financial exposure

Revised Organizational Framework Decision

• Recommendation: “Approve phased deployment with proper change management”
• Justification: High savings potential ($14K-26K annually), substantial but manageable investment
• Risk Assessment: Higher complexity but proportionally higher rewards

Key Insights from Correction

1. Business Case Strength

The organizational reality makes document automation a strategic imperative rather than a nice-to-have efficiency improvement. Annual savings of $14K-26K justify significant implementation investment.

2. Implementation Approach

Success requires enterprise change management across 40 departments, not a simple technology deployment. This changes the required skills, timeline, and governance structure.

3. Risk Profile

Higher complexity but lower relative risk - the substantial savings provide significant buffer for implementation challenges and cost overruns.

4. Success Metrics

Need department-by-department tracking rather than overall adoption metrics. Success depends on achieving critical mass across diverse organizational units.

Lessons for Future Analysis

Critical Questions for Organizational Tech Projects

1. Who actually uses the current process? (Not just who owns it)
2. How is work distributed across the organization? (Centralized vs. distributed)
3. What’s the true scope of change required? (Technical vs. organizational)
4. How do benefits scale with organizational complexity? (Linear vs. multiplicative)

Framework Improvements Applied

• Organizational impact assessment added to all cost calculations
• Multi-departmental implementation strategy replaces single-team approach
• Enterprise change management requirements explicitly documented
• Phased approval gates to manage implementation risk and investment

The organizational scope correction transforms the project from a small efficiency improvement to a significant business transformation opportunity, requiring appropriate planning and investment to realize the full potential benefits.