BlogAI strategy
How to check AI readiness on one real process
Your company is ready for AI when one specific process has what a system needs: past cases to test against, data it is allowed to read, systems it can reach, rules for what it may do, and people who will check and own the results. Check that on one real sample case. A general maturity score will not tell you, because a company can score well overall and still fail on the one process it wants to change. The checklist below is sorted into five areas: skills, data, systems, rules and people.
Is our company ready for AI?
Ask the question about a process and the answer becomes concrete. Ready for AI in general means little: a company may have good IT and clear rules and still lack the data for the process that matters. Readiness is a list of conditions for one process, each either met or not, with a name next to every gap.
Data is where most checks find their gaps. In ServiceNow's survey published on 14 July 2026, 72% of German companies named data accuracy, data access and data management as the biggest hurdles, and only 16% had established test, audit and risk processes for AI. In Bitkom's survey published on 14 September 2026, 40% of companies that do not use AI named missing data, and 50% of companies that use it named data preparation as a large cost item.
Should a readiness check give a maturity score or follow a real case?
A maturity model places the whole company on a scale, usually from first experiments to AI across the business. That is useful for comparing yourself with others and for a first conversation in management. It does not tell you whether the invoices in your mailbox can be read, whether the ERP has an interface the system may use, or who will approve the results.
A sample case does. Take one real, recent case of the process you have in mind, an ordinary one rather than an exception, and follow it from the moment it arrives to the moment it is closed. Every system it touches, every document someone opens, every decision and every person involved becomes a line on the checklist. Then check the same lines on a set of past cases with known outcomes, because a single case can be unusual.
How do we run the check on one process?
- 1
Choose the process
Pick a candidate with many similar cases and a result a person can check quickly. If several teams compete for the first place, score their proposals on the same questions first.
- 2
Pick a sample case and the people who know it
One recent ordinary case, the person who handled it, the process owner and someone from IT who knows the systems. Do not start with the hardest exception.
- 3
Follow the case from start to finish
Write down where it arrived, which documents and systems were used, what was looked up, what was decided and by whom, and where the result went.
- 4
Check each step against the checklist
For every step, ask whether the data is digital, whether a system may read it, whether there is an interface, whether there is a rule for what the system may do, and who would check the result.
- 5
Collect past cases with known outcomes
These become the test set later. If nobody can say what the right outcome of a past case was, quality cannot be measured yet, and that is a gap in its own right.
- 6
Write the gap list
Each gap gets an owner and a decision: fix it first, work around it, or choose another process.
What belongs on an AI readiness checklist?
The checklist has five areas: skills, data, systems, rules and people. Answer each question for the sample case alone. A line only counts as met when someone can show it. Assuming it is true is not enough.
| Area | Question for the sample case | Met when |
|---|---|---|
| Skills | Does someone understand what the system will do and where it can fail? | A named person can explain the workflow and its failure types |
| Skills | Can the reviewers judge the output quickly? | The people who handle the case today agree to review and know what to look for |
| Data | Is the information the case needs available in digital form? | Documents and records sit in systems, not only on paper or in someone's head |
| Data | Is there an owner who allows its use? | A named data owner has approved the use for this purpose |
| Data | Are there past cases with known outcomes? | A set of recent, representative cases with the correct result is available |
| Data | Do permissions travel with the data? | The system can see only what the person handling the case may see |
| Systems | Can a system reach the source systems? | Read access through an interface or a service account exists or can be granted |
| Systems | Can the result go back where it belongs? | There is a way to write to the ERP, CRM, document or ticket system, or a person transfers it after approval |
| Systems | Where may the system run? | The data class is clear: a cloud service in an EU region, your own cloud account or your own servers |
| Rules | What may the system do on its own, and what needs approval? | Approval points are written down for each step |
| Rules | Have the data protection officer and IT security seen the data flow? | The data flow and the processing contracts have been reviewed |
| Rules | Does the works council need to be involved? | The question has been asked and, where it applies, the conversation has started |
| Rules | Does the AI Act treat this use as high-risk? | Checked, and for high-risk uses people still take the decisions |
| People | Who owns the process and the system after go-live? | One accountable owner is named |
| People | Do the people who will use it want it? | They took part in the check and their objections are on the gap list |
| People | Who in management backs it? | A sponsor who will decide at each review point |
Some uses are high-risk under the AI Act, among them screening and ranking job applicants and credit scoring, both listed in Annex III. A company that deploys such a system takes on duties of its own, including human oversight by competent people, keeping the logs the system generates and informing workers' representatives before using it at the workplace. We do not automate such decisions without people. Whether a use falls under Annex III is for your company to decide, advised by its data protection officer and lawyers.
How good are our data quality and availability?
Data does not have to be perfect to be good enough for AI. It covers the cases the system will see, has an owner, can be reached with the right permissions, and lets you tell the current version from older ones. You do not need a data lake or a company-wide data project before the first process. You need the sources this process uses, in a usable state. Check four things on the sample case and the past cases:
- Coverage: do the past cases include the variants that occur, such as different suppliers, formats and languages, and the difficult cases as well as the easy ones?
- Correctness: where the outcome of a past case is recorded, is it right? A test set built on wrong outcomes measures the wrong thing.
- Currency: for questions answered from documents, which version is valid, and who removes outdated ones?
- Access: can a service account read the data with permissions that will still apply in production, rather than through a one-off export?
Finance teams feel this most. In KPMG's Global AI in Finance report of 22 May 2026, 36% of finance leaders named data quality as the biggest challenge for AI in finance. The guides on data readiness for AI projects and on preparing sources for RAG, where answers are drawn from your own documents with the source shown, go into each point.
Is there a free AI readiness check?
Yes. Mittelstand-Digital Zentren run free introductory AI consultations, and chambers of industry and commerce offer their own checks, for example the KI-Reifegrad-Check of IHK Schwaben and the KI-Check of IHK Stuttgart. Ask your chamber about the terms. They make a sensible start. They are neutral and structured, and they get management talking about AI in shared terms.
Know what such a check is designed to do. IHK Schwaben describes its check as a first structured assessment and says it is not consulting, legal advice or an audit. By design, a general check like this leaves out what only shows up on your own process:
- Whether your own cases can be handled, because no sample case is followed through your systems.
- Access and permissions in your ERP, CRM, document or ticket systems.
- Which infrastructure fits your data: a cloud service, your own cloud account or your own servers.
- How output quality will be measured, and how much review it will need.
- Building and running the system afterwards.
Use both: the chamber check for orientation, the sample-case check for the process you want to change. Our free 30-minute call with an engineer needs no access to your systems or data and can go through the checklist above for one process with you. If your staff already use AI tools, the free AI usage review adds one page on AI spend and quality, built from exports you choose to send.
What comes after the readiness check?
The gap list decides the next step, and it usually points to one of three outcomes:
- Ready, or close to it: measure today's process, agree acceptance criteria and start a pilot on your own cases.
- Ready after fixes: close the gaps that block a pilot first, usually access to a system, an owner for a data source or approval of the data flow, and keep the rest for the step into production.
- Not this process: if the data is missing or nobody can say what a right result looks like, choose the next candidate rather than forcing it.
The guide on introducing AI in your company describes the stages from here to a running system.
AI strategy and rolloutData integration for AIHeads of Digital and AI officers
Questions
What is the difference between an AI readiness check and an AI potential analysis?
A potential analysis looks for where AI could help: which processes, and how much work they involve. A readiness check asks whether a chosen process can take AI now: data, systems, rules and people. Do the potential analysis first to choose the process, then the readiness check on that process.
Is AI readiness the same as KI-Readiness?
Yes, the English and German terms mean the same thing. KI-Reifegrad, AI maturity, is related but different: it usually places the whole company on a scale, while readiness can be checked for one process.
Do we need a data lake before we start with AI?
No. The first process needs its own sources in a usable state, with an owner and access. A central data platform can come later, when several processes need the same data.
Does a readiness check need access to our systems?
Not at first. A sample case can be followed with the person who handled it, on their screen, without anyone outside getting access. Read access for a service account comes later, when the pilot needs it, and with the data owner's approval.
Who should take part in the check?
The process owner, one or two people who handle the cases today, someone from IT who knows the systems and, for the rules, the data protection officer. Management needs the result but does not have to sit in on every session.
Related services
AI strategy and rollout
AI strategy and rollout that starts with one running, measured system on your own processes and builds the roadmap around its figures.
Data integration for AI
Answers from file shares, SharePoint, ERP and tickets in seconds, for assistants and agents, with permissions carried through and tested.
Free AI usage review
One page for management on where your AI money goes, whether it pays off and what to change, from exports you choose to share. Free, no system access.
More from the blog
AI project data readiness
The data owners, system access, representative cases and expert time an AI project needs before it starts, with a start checklist and what can wait.
Choosing the first AI workflow
How to choose the first process to automate with AI by scoring every team's proposal on volume, variation, system access, review effort and known outcomes.
Introducing AI in your company
Where to start with AI, why so many pilots stall, and how one process gets from the first idea to a running system, with the people who need to be involved along the way.
RAG source readiness
How to decide which documents a retrieval assistant should use, who owns each source and how to find missing answers before anything is indexed.
Talk to an engineer
Bring one piece of work you would like to improve. The call takes 30 minutes and needs no access to your systems or your data.
Booking runs on Google Calendar.
Prefer to write first? Leave your email and a few lines, and we reply with times.
Look for the draft in your email program
Send it from there, and an engineer replies in person with times for a 30-minute call. If no draft has opened, write to us at miki@cloudsail.com.