Stop Getting in Your Own Way: AI and the Basics of Organizational Adaptability [Part 1 of 3]

In an age of AI and accelerating change, the biggest threat to your organization isn’t your competition. It’s your own habits and ways of working. Organizations simply can’t afford to get in their own way. This series explores how your organization could be undermining its ability to make changes in strategic and intentional ways.  

Before we get started, let’s look at 3 definitions: 
  • Organization [noun]
    A structured group of people working together with shared goals. It functions as a single entity (such as a business, non-profit, or government agency) that coordinates resources, tasks, and relationships to achieve specific objectives. (Merriam-Webster)  
  • Adapt [verb]
    To modify or adjust something—including your own behavior—to make it suitable for a new purpose or to fit new, changing, or unpredictable conditions (Merriam-Webster)
  • Organizational Adaptability [adjective]
    An organization’s ability to quickly and intentionally adjust its strategies, structures and processes in response to (or in support of) change.

Mastering organizational adaptability requires the harmonious coordination of multiple capabilities.

In this series, you’ll learn about 3 ways you’re undercutting your adaptability and how AI can help you take control of the basics. The three topics will be: 

  1. People waste time having the same conversations over and over again. 
  2. Failing to inspect the results of your work. 
  3. Sinking hours upon hours into manual / repeatable tasks. 

Topic 1: People waste time having the same conversations over and over again. 

How many times have you been in a meeting and made a decision only to find yourself rehashing the decision rationale again and again and again? 
 
I find this pattern occurs most often when teams have made a decision NOT to do something. The churn comes in failing to remember WHY the decision was made. I don’t know about you, but if I could have $100 back for every time I had to repeatedly unpack decision logic – I’d be a very rich woman. (Well, maybe not very rich, but you get my point.) 
 
Organizational adaptability thrives when there is fierce prioritization. Adaptable organizations do NOT work on everything all the time. They choose the most important areas to focus on and possess strong attention to results. 
 
Intentionally deciding NOT to do something is critical for prioritization. Rarely does it mean the thing will never happen. Instead, it means it won’t happen now. When the team wastes cycles revisiting these decisions focus erodes and adaptability decreases.  
 
With every day that passes more (and more and more and more) information is thrown at us to consume. This makes it harder to retain decision rationale in our biological memory.  
 
So how do we keep decisions stickier by preserving the logic behind our intentional choices? Let’s use AI. And I don’t mean AI note takers that we never go back and review. I mean AI for the purpose of supporting organizational memory by generating dynamic decision rationale.

For some perspective on how it can work, let’s turn to guidance from my colleague Bryce Arii:

A notes app stores what you said. Organizational memory notices when you're about to contradict yourself. Most teams have the first. Almost none have the second. 

So decisions get made, the logic evaporates, and three months later the same debate reopens from scratch because nobody remembers why it was closed. Or worse, a new call quietly cuts against one that's still standing, and you don't find out until it costs you a delivery date. 

The fix isn't another AI note taker you never reopen. It's using AI to support organizational memory by generating dynamic decision rationale. Capture every meaningful decision, especially the "not now" ones, as a short structured record: what we decided, why, what we considered and passed on, and what would have to be true to revisit it. 

Then make that record do three things. Make it findable by topic, not by date, so the original reasoning shows up before the debate restarts. Make it answer questions, so a new hire asking "why aren't we doing X?" gets the actual rationale in seconds instead of pulling three busy people into a thread. And make it flag when revisiting is genuinely warranted, so you reconsider on purpose instead of churning. 

That last one only works if something can watch the condition. "Revisit when steel drops below $800 a ton" only fires if the system can see the commodity feed. So the record can't sit in a notes app off to the side. It lives in your data platform, next to the operational data it depends on, and an agent reaches that data through a standard connection layer called the Model Context Protocol, or MCP. One common doorway instead of a brittle integration for every tool. Standard Work before AI Work in practice: the agent is only as sharp as the context underneath it. 

Make it concrete. It's Q2, and you decide not to build a customer portal because engineering is committed to the ERP cutover through Q3. You capture it, with one revisit condition: cutover complete, or inbound portal requests cross thirty in a quarter. Five months pass and nobody relitigates it, because the rationale is right there for anyone who asks. Then in Q4 the support queue trips the threshold. The agent is watching that feed, so it flags you: the condition you set in April has been met, and the reason for waiting closed in September. Want to reopen this? 

There's a second catch teams never see coming. Six weeks earlier, a different group commits to a custom integration with a Q4 delivery date to win an account. Reasonable on its own. Except it needs the same two engineers, in the exact window you agreed to protect. Nobody was careless. They just didn't have the first decision in front of them. This time the system isn't watching a threshold, it's watching for conflict, and it flags the collision before it becomes a missed date: these two cannot both hold, which one wins? That only works if both decisions were captured the same structured way. Standard Work before AI Work, again. 

Notice what the machine did, and what it didn't. It remembered. It watched. It caught the threshold and the collision. But it never made a decision. A person decided the portal could wait. A person set the condition. A person chooses which commitment wins, because that's judgment, not retrieval.

Mastering organizational adaptability requires dozens of organizational capabilities to be running at peak performance. The basics of achieving high levels of adaptability means you need to have strong organizational memory around decisions -specifically things you decided NOT to do- so that you don’t waste cycles rehashing the logic over and over again. 

In the next two articles from this series you’ll learn about: 

  • Having strong discipline in evaluating the results of your work to know if you generated the intended value and are able to make more informed / intentional choices in the future. 
  • Minimizing non-value add repetitive or manual tasks to create capacity for high-value knowledge work. 

These are only 3 of the many things that can unlock a greater level of adaptability in your organization, and they happen to be 3 that can be directly addressed by using AI. 

This article is brought to you by me, Leslie Porter, and my collaborator Bryce Arii. Bryce has been a long-time team member and collaborator with Adaptivity and I can truly say this series wouldn’t have happened without him. 

If you’re curious how Adaptivity can support your journey to leverage AI to maximize organization adaptability, we’d love to have a chat. Start a conversation today.