Most organisations cannot prove their AI spend connects to value
This publication exists to close that gap with evidence, frameworks, and governance that would survive an audit.
Flagship frameworks
Close the value gap
Framework
The AI Value Gap
Why most organisations can track AI cost precisely but cannot prove AI value—and what that means for governance, accountability, and portfolio decisions.
Framework
AI TCO Framework
A seven-layer cost model for understanding what AI really costs once orchestration, governance, support, and hidden dependencies are included.
Framework
Value Management Layers
A governance stack for connecting AI usage, output quality, workflow impact, portfolio decisions, and personal accountability across the enterprise.
Framework
Five Levels of AI Economics
A maturity model for moving from fragmented AI activity to governed, provable, portfolio-level AI value that can be defended in an audit.
Why the gap matters
Who this is for
Start with your role
Different roles need different entry points into AI economics. Choose your perspective.
CFO
Prove AI value, manage portfolio risk, and connect AI spend to business outcomes
Lead metric
Attribution coverage
CIO
Orchestrate AI value across the technology estate and operating model
Lead metric
Attribution coverage
CAIO
Build governance that scales from pilots to production AI
Lead metric
Attribution coverage
FinOps Leader
Extend FinOps practice to cover AI cost, usage, and value
Lead metric
Attribution coverage
TBM Practitioner
Integrate AI economics into TBM taxonomy and reporting
Lead metric
Attribution coverage
Strategy Leader
Connect AI investment decisions to portfolio value and risk
Lead metric
Attribution coverage
Site structure
How the site is organised
This is a guide to the argument, not a fixed sequence. Most readers will move back and forth between value, cost, governance, operating model and evidence.