FREE EXCEL TEMPLATE + COMPLETED EXAMPLE

AI Readiness Assessment Template A Worked Workflow Example

AI readiness assessment template for one workflow: download the free Excel workbook, follow a completed example and decide what needs to happen before a pilot.

  • Blank worksheet
  • Completed example
  • Scope & decision record
  • Scoring rubric

Excel · Editable · No form or account

Workflow readinessCompleted example · Excel workbook
PREVIEW
EXAMPLE WORKFLOWHost data → structured analysis → analyst review
Opportunity84/100
Readiness60/100
Resolve data authority first

A high opportunity score cannot clear a critical prerequisite.

24 questions6 dimensionsEditable actions

Illustrative scores. Planning guidance, not client results.

Key Takeaways

How do you turn AI readiness answers into a decision?

01

Scope one workflow

Name the inputs, expected output and people responsible for the proposed work.

02

Score with evidence

Separate business opportunity from implementation readiness. Keep the rationale beside each response.

03

Resolve critical prerequisites

Document data authority, evaluation and human accountability before approving a pilot.

The short answer

What is an AI readiness test?

An AI readiness test is a structured review of the prerequisites for using AI. This template evaluates one proposed workflow and turns the answers into scores, critical prerequisites and assigned next actions.

Use it when you can name a recurring task, the people doing it and the output that needs to improve. It suits an operations, IT or security leader preparing a scoped automation discussion. If you are evaluating an entire business unit, use the separate enterprise AI maturity scorecard.

GS Consulting develops secure AI automation across approved data, model processing and existing systems. This resource belongs to our enterprise AI guide series. For help choosing the workflow first, see how to identify workflows for AI automation.

What should an AI readiness assessment template include?

An AI readiness assessment template should include a defined scope, questions with a scoring rubric, supporting evidence, critical prerequisites and an action record with owners and review dates.

Free Excel workbook

Your working copy, with the example included.

Four tabs: a blank assessment, a completed example, a scope and decision record, and the response rubric. Start with the scope record, then score the same workflow. Formulas calculate the scores and flag critical prerequisites as you enter responses.

Download the Excel template No account or email required. Use Excel or a compatible spreadsheet application.
  • Workflow scope. Use the Scope and decision tab to identify the trigger, inputs, expected output, operating owner, destination system and success criteria. Record the decision, restrictions and approval evidence after review.
  • 24 questions. Four questions in each of six assessment dimensions, with response anchors from 0 to 4.
  • Evidence and actions. Record a reference, responsible owner, next action and review date beside each answer.
  • Separate scores. Compare opportunity with readiness without allowing strengths to hide a critical prerequisite.

Keep sensitive evidence in its approved repository. Use general labels and reference identifiers in the workbook rather than copying customer records, security findings or restricted data into it.

How to conduct an AI readiness assessment?

Define one workflow, gather evidence with its owners, answer the questions, review critical prerequisites and assign the work needed before a pilot decision.

  1. 01

    Set the boundary

    Write down what starts the work, what information is used and what output reaches the next system. Identify the person who approves consequential actions.

  2. 02

    Bring the evidence

    Review representative inputs, the current procedure, workload measurements, permissions and examples of acceptable output with the business, data and technical owners.

  3. 03

    Complete the questionnaire

    Use the question specific response anchors in the Rubric tab. A zero is an actual selected answer. Leave an unanswered question blank and collect what is missing.

  4. 04

    Read the prerequisites before the scores

    Check data authority, the ability to evaluate outputs, review before harmful action and accountable human ownership. A critical prerequisite takes precedence over the ordinary recommendation.

  5. 05

    Assign the next decision

    Name who will resolve each gap, what evidence will demonstrate completion and when the team will review the workflow again. Approve a bounded pilot only through the appropriate human review.

Completed example

What does a completed AI readiness assessment look like?

A completed assessment connects each response to its supporting evidence and explains the next decision. In this fictional example, preparing host data for analyst review scores 84/100 for opportunity and 60/100 for readiness, but unresolved data authority prevents a pilot.

InputHost and operational data
Proposed outputValidated, structured analysis
Decision authorityAnalyst review before action

The architecture is informed by GS’s published private AI cyber-analysis implementation. Every assessment answer, score, effort estimate and evidence record below is illustrative. These are not the client’s historical assessment or measured results.

Business opportunity84/100

Frequent work, material consequences and a structured output support further investigation.

Implementation readiness60/100

Data preparation, the model boundary and operating recovery still need work.

These are planning scores, not percentages of readiness or probabilities of success. The example remains on hold for AI data processing until authority is documented and the proposed scope is reviewed.

The worked copy includes an action for the data owner to document authority and an action for the technical owner to define the processing boundary. Review occurs when the required evidence is available; the example does not promise a delivery date.

How do you measure AI readiness?

Score each response from 0 to 4 using its own rubric, normalize the four questions in each dimension to 100, then calculate separate Opportunity and Implementation Readiness scores. Critical prerequisites override the score based recommendation.

The worksheet uses the same method as the live workflow readiness assessment. Expand a dimension below to see all 24 selected answers and their illustrative basis.

01Business Value88/100
BV1

How frequently is this workflow performed?

4/4

Selected answer: Many times each day or continuously

Illustrative basis: Illustrative queue log: new host artifacts arrive throughout each workday.

BV2

Approximately how much skilled staff effort does the workflow require each month?

3/4

Selected answer: 161 to 500 hours

Illustrative basis: Illustrative time study: 161 to 500 skilled staff hours per month. This is a scenario assumption, not a GS client result.

BV3

What is the effect when this workflow is delayed or backlogged?

4/4

Selected answer: Material effect on security, compliance, revenue, mission, or customer outcomes

Illustrative basis: Illustrative backlog review: delayed analysis can affect security operations.

BV4

How clearly can the desired outcome be measured?

3/4

Selected answer: The output and most success measures are defined

Illustrative basis: Draft output fields and turnaround measures exist; acceptance criteria still need review.

02Process and Knowledge69/100
PK1

How well is the current workflow documented?

3/4

Selected answer: A documented process exists and is generally followed

Illustrative basis: A documented preparation procedure exists and is generally followed.

PK2

How repeatable is the workflow?

3/4

Selected answer: Most cases follow the same path with identifiable exceptions

Illustrative basis: Most artifacts follow the same path; exceptions are recognizable.

PK3

How consistently do experienced staff reach the same conclusion?

3/4

Selected answer: Staff generally agree when using the same information

Illustrative basis: Reviewers generally agree when given the same source information.

PK4

How many representative examples of acceptable past work are available?

2/4

Selected answer: 10 to 50

Illustrative basis: Twenty fictional reference examples represent acceptable past work.

03Data Readiness50/100
DR1

How accessible are the workflow inputs?

3/4

Selected answer: Reliable files, exports, queries, or APIs exist with some preparation required

Illustrative basis: Reliable file exports exist, with preparation required before analysis.

DR2

What is the current quality and consistency of the data?

2/4

Selected answer: The data is usable after substantial cleaning

Illustrative basis: A fictional data profile finds usable inputs that need substantial cleaning.

DR3

Does the organization have documented authority to use this data for the proposed automation?

0/4

Selected answer: Authority is unknown, prohibited, or likely inconsistent with current obligations

Illustrative basis: Permission for the proposed AI processing has not been established. Existing analyst access alone does not document that permission.

Critical prerequisite: resolve before a pilot.

DR4

Is representative historical data available for testing?

3/4

Selected answer: A representative history is available for testing

Illustrative basis: A representative history is assumed available for testing once its use is authorized.

04AI Suitability94/100
AS1

How well does the task align with analysis of digital information?

4/4

Selected answer: The task involves repeatable reasoning over accessible digital inputs with a definable output

Illustrative basis: The proposed task reasons over digital artifacts with a definable output.

AS2

How clearly can the required output be structured?

4/4

Selected answer: The output can use a clear machine readable schema with validation rules

Illustrative basis: A draft JSON schema defines the required analysis fields and validation rules.

AS3

How can output quality be evaluated?

3/4

Selected answer: A benchmark and acceptance thresholds can be created

Illustrative basis: An expert benchmark and acceptance thresholds can be created; testing is still required.

AS4

What would happen if the system produced an incorrect result?

4/4

Selected answer: The result is advisory, prioritization, or triage output that must be reviewed before consequential action

Illustrative basis: Output is advisory. An analyst must review it before any consequential action.

05Security and Governance63/100
SG1

How well is the sensitivity of the inputs and outputs understood?

3/4

Selected answer: Data categories and handling rules are defined

Illustrative basis: Data categories and handling rules are defined for this fictional scope.

SG2

Has an acceptable model and data deployment boundary been identified?

2/4

Selected answer: Requirements are understood, but the architecture is not selected

Illustrative basis: Local processing is preferred, but the architecture has not been selected.

SG3

How mature are the access, secrets, logging, and audit controls?

2/4

Selected answer: Some access controls and logs are available

Illustrative basis: Some access controls and logs exist; complete operating controls remain to be designed.

SG4

Who remains accountable for consequential decisions?

3/4

Selected answer: Human approval points and escalation paths are defined

Illustrative basis: Human approval points and escalation paths are defined.

06Integration and Operations69/100
IO1

How can the workflow connect to existing systems?

3/4

Selected answer: APIs, databases, queues, or supported integrations are available

Illustrative basis: Supported database or API interfaces are assumed available for the destination.

IO2

Are responsible owners identified?

3/4

Selected answer: Business and technical owners are identified

Illustrative basis: Business and technical owners are identified for the example.

IO3

How will the workflow be monitored and recovered when failures occur?

2/4

Selected answer: Basic scheduling and logging are available

Illustrative basis: Basic scheduling and logging exist; recovery and alert handling need development.

IO4

How clearly can an initial pilot be bounded?

3/4

Selected answer: One workflow, defined users, and specific data sources have been identified

Illustrative basis: One workflow, a defined analyst group and specific input categories are identified.

Opportunity score

35% Business Value + 30% Process and Knowledge + 35% AI Suitability

round(88 × 0.35 + 69 × 0.30 + 94 × 0.35) = 84

Implementation Readiness score

35% Data Readiness + 35% Security and Governance + 30% Integration and Operations

round(50 × 0.35 + 63 × 0.35 + 69 × 0.30) = 60

Each dimension is rounded before the weighted calculation. For example, Business Value totals 14 of 16 available points: 14 ÷ 16 × 100 = 87.5, rounded to 88. The four critical response checks are DR3, AS3, AS4 and SG4. A selected zero on any of those questions requires a critical prerequisite to be addressed. These four automatic checks are a limited aid. An unflagged result does not establish that every permission, security or operating requirement is satisfied.

See the score based recommendation rules
OpportunityReadinessPlanning recommendation
AnyAnyA critical prerequisite overrides the ordinary result.
Below 60Below 60Redesign or deprioritize the workflow.
Below 6060 or aboveTechnically feasible, but the business case is weak.
60 or aboveBelow 60High potential, but preparation is required.
60 to 7960 to 79Conditional candidate for a controlled pilot.
60 to 7980 or aboveGood candidate for a controlled pilot.
80 or above60 to 79Strong opportunity with readiness gaps.
80 or above80 or aboveStrong candidate for a controlled pilot.

These weights and thresholds are GS planning choices. They are not validated industry benchmarks, probabilities of success or an independent determination that a workflow is ready for production.

What are the five pillars of AI readiness?

One useful organizational grouping is strategy, data, technology, people and governance. Frameworks use different names and counts; there is no single mandatory five pillar structure.

For example, Microsoft’s organizational assessment describes seven pillars, while Cisco’s assessment uses six. The count matters less than whether the questions cover the proposed work.

The GS workflow template uses six dimensions. Business Value tests whether the work merits investment. Process and Knowledge examines repeatability. Data Readiness checks usable and authorized inputs. AI Suitability addresses output structure and evaluation. Security and Governance covers the processing boundary and accountability. Integration and Operations examines how the workflow will run and recover.

What are the five stages of AI readiness?

There is no universal five stage readiness standard. GS’s separate enterprise maturity planning model uses ad hoc, controlled pilot, operational, scaled and governed, and adaptive.

Those stages describe demonstrated organizational capability. They do not replace the workflow assessment’s question: does this proposed use have the prerequisites to proceed? An organization with mature shared services can still propose a workflow with unapproved data or an output nobody can evaluate.

Use the enterprise AI maturity guide and scorecard to compare business units or assess recurring practices. Use this template to prepare one proposed workflow for a decision.

What should you do after an AI readiness assessment?

Resolve critical prerequisites first, then assign the evidence and engineering work needed for a bounded pilot. Preserve the assessment so the next review can show what changed.

01 · Before processing

Confirm authority

The data owner documents the permitted purpose and handling conditions. An unresolved permission question remains visible.

02 · Before integration

Test the output

The technical owner defines the schema and a representative evaluation set. Reviewers agree on acceptance criteria.

03 · Before a pilot

Approve the scope

The business and security owners review the boundary, human approvals and recovery plan. Record the decision and restrictions.

Apply it to your workflow

Bring the task, the systems and the decision you need to make.

Complete the template with general descriptions. GS Consulting can help review the gaps and define the next implementation step.

Keep sensitive or restricted information out of the contact form.

What is this assessment based on?

The template reproduces GS Consulting’s existing 24 question workflow assessment. Its scoring weights, thresholds and critical prerequisites are documented above and in the workbook.

This is a derived planning tool. Self reported answers need evidence and appropriate review. It provides no legal, security, compliance, certification, procurement or investment determination. A completed workbook does not authorize production use, establish savings or remove the need to test the actual workflow.

Methodology: GS Consulting. Published October 24, 2026. The workbook contains the blank template, response rubric, scope and decision record, and fictional worked copy.

Is the AI readiness assessment template free?

Yes. Download the Excel workbook without a form or account. It includes the blank template, completed example, scope and decision record, and response rubric. You can also use the online assessment and view your results before choosing whether to request a review.

© GS Consulting, LLC . All Rights Reserved | For more information, contact us at info@gsconsultingllc.com. Image credit: ©iStock.com/Vertigo3d. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use