AIDA Framework
A score the board can fund.
Agentive's Independent Diagnostic for AI: six dimensions that decide whether an initiative survives the organization, not the demo.
Why a framework at all
Most AI diagnoses are either a vendor qualification or a maturity model written for a paper. AIDA is a field instrument: it is scored, it is inconvenient, and it produces a sequence, not a heat map you cannot act on.
Each dimension is assessed with evidence: interviews, artifacts, architecture, and behavior. The output is a 0–100 score per dimension, an overall band, and a 12-month plan ordered by return and constraint.
Bands
Nascent
Conversation, not capability. Baseline, one owned use case, honest data.
Emerging
Pockets of activity. Prioritize, name owners, kill work without a number.
Capable
Ingredients present. Constraint is usually governance, change, or sequence.
Ready
Operate AI as a system. Risk is complacency and vendor capture.
Where programs actually die.
Strategy & Vision
Is there a board-aligned AI strategy with owners, dates, and numbers — or a slide with aspirations?
Data Infrastructure
Can the data you already have actually support production AI, or only a demo?
Talent & Capabilities
Does the organization have the literacy, time, and permission to use AI — not just buy it?
Technology Stack
Will current systems, identity, and integrations carry an AI workload in production?
Governance & Ethics
Who is accountable when a model is wrong, biased, or leaks — and is that written down?
Change Readiness
Have past technology programs actually changed how people work, or just how decks look?
Next step
Five minutes, or thirty days.
The public assessment is directional. The full audit is evidentiary: interviews, artifacts, and a report the board will actually read.