---
id: "framework-gen-ai-project-selection"
type: "framework"
source_timestamps: ["§ How Can Organizations Pick the Best Gen AI Projects?"]
tags: ["project-management", "portfolio-strategy"]
related: ["concept-responsible-rebels", "concept-political-alignment-projects"]
speakers: ["Tom Davenport", "John J. Sviokla"]
steps: ["Fund the responsible rebels: Back practical innovators via stage-gated funding and executive sponsorship.", "\\\"Choose practical", "quick wins: Target fast cycle-time-to-value areas (e.g.", "inside sales) with clearly defined outcome variables within the fiscal year.\\\"", "Ensure political alignment: Select projects where the financial cost and the business benefit sit within the same executive's organizational unit.", "Link to firm identity: Ensure the project directly supports the core mission and identity of the organization."]
sources: ["spine"]
sourceVaultSlug: "hbr-seg-spine"
originDay: 1
articleStem: "hbr-cl-95-6-disciplines-genai"
sourceUrl: "https://hbr.org/2024/07/the-6-disciplines-companies-need-to-get-the-most-out-of-gen-ai"
sourceTitle: "The 6 Disciplines Companies Need to Get the Most Out of Gen AI"
---
# Gen AI Project Selection Criteria

Building the [[framework-6-disciplines-gen-ai|six disciplines]] creates *capability*; this framework converts capability into *realized value* by governing which Gen AI initiatives to actually fund. It is a strategic filter optimizing for speed, political viability, and strategic alignment.

**The four criteria:**

1. **Fund the responsible rebels.** Back the [[concept-responsible-rebels|practical innovators]] who drive *productive variance*, but do so through disciplined mechanisms — stage-gated innovation funds that require executive sponsorship and proof of economic value to continue. See [[action-fund-innovation-stage-gates]] and the contrarian principle behind it, [[contrarian-productive-variance]].
2. **Choose projects that are practical, quick wins, and politically aligned.** Target areas with fast cycle-time-to-value (the authors cite inside sales) where the outcome variable is clearly defined and measurable within the fiscal year.
3. **Ensure political alignment.** Select projects where the financial *cost* of implementation and the resulting business *benefit* sit inside the same executive's organizational unit — the [[concept-political-alignment-projects|locus-of-costs-vs-benefits]] rule. Cross-departmental projects (cost in Marketing, benefit in Customer Service) stall. See [[action-align-cost-benefit-silos]].
4. **Link to the identity of the firm.** Ensure the project directly supports the organization's core mission. The worked example: [[entity-intuit-d1]]'s mission is "to power prosperity around the world," and [[entity-intuit-assist]] applies Gen AI to deliver personalized financial advice — a perfect identity fit.

**Why this framework exists.** Even organizations that master the six disciplines can waste them on politically doomed or strategically peripheral projects. The concluding warning, [[quote-minor-tinkering]], applies here: superficial project selection produces only minor outcomes.

Enrichment counterpoint: some firms deliberately fund cross-unit projects (costs in one unit, benefits in another) using central budgets or top-down mandates, which can work when governance is strong. Over-optimizing for political ease can also starve strategically critical but politically difficult initiatives (e.g., shared AI infrastructure). Authored by [[entity-tom-davenport]] and [[entity-john-j-sviokla]].


## Related across articles
- [[concept-buy-sell-hold-scoring]]
- [[framework-three-portfolio-mechanisms]]