Capability mapping
The six things AI reliably does today — classify, extract, generate, converse, predict, optimize — and how to match them to business tasks without falling for the demo.
You can't spot opportunities in a technology you can't describe. Strip the vendor language and today's deployable AI does six things reliably enough to build on. Learn them as verbs, and every process walk-through becomes an opportunity scan:
- Classify — read something messy, assign it a bucket: route the email, triage the claim, flag the risky invoice. The workhorse; most 'AI transformation' is classification wearing a suit.
- Extract — pull structured facts out of unstructured mess: PO numbers from emails, terms from contracts, weights from shipping docs. Alder's ops teams re-type data between documents and systems all day; extraction is that, automated.
- Generate — produce a competent first draft: the customer reply, the job posting, the incident summary. The human moves from author to editor. Value scales with how much your org writes.
- Converse — sustain a useful dialogue over your knowledge: the policy Q&A bot, the onboarding assistant, the customer self-service flow. Needs grounding in your documents to be safe (your teams will hear this as 'RAG').
- Predict — estimate what happens next from history: demand next month, which shipment will be late, which customer will churn. The oldest family (classic ML), still compounding — and entirely dependent on decent historical data.
- Optimize — choose best options under constraints: routes, load plans, schedules, pricing. Deep Alder relevance; often more operations research than 'AI', which matters zero to the P&L.
Matching capability to task: the three fit tests
- The error-tolerance test. AI outputs are usually right. Tasks that tolerate a reviewed draft or a triaged queue fit today; tasks where a single silent error is catastrophic need humans in the loop by design, not aspiration. 'Where does usually right, always reviewed create value?' is the strategist's question.
- The data test. Predict and optimize eat historical data; converse eats well-organized documents; extract and classify are the least demanding starters. If the honest answer to 'do we have the data?' is no, the initiative is a data initiative first (Module 3 returns to this hard).
- The volume test. AI's economics are per-unit: high-volume tasks (Alder: 3,000 delivery-exception emails a month) repay setup; rare tasks don't. Capability without volume is a demo.
Every capability demos two levels above where it deploys: demos are curated inputs, no integration, no edge cases, no tired user at 4:50pm. When evaluating any claim — vendor or internal — apply the demo discount: ask what the worst realistic input looks like and what happens on it, and ask to see the failure path, not the happy path. Leaders who ask 'show me it failing' get measurably better systems built for them.
I lead [function] at a [size/industry] company. Here are our 10 highest-effort recurring activities: [list]. For each, tell me which AI capability applies (classify / extract / generate / converse / predict / optimize / none), what the human's role becomes, the error tolerance it would need, and the data it would depend on. Be skeptical - mark any activity where AI's realistic contribution is marginal, and say why.
Run this on your own function this week. The 'be skeptical' clause matters: unconstrained, models flatter every activity into an AI opportunity — you want the two it refuses to flatter.