GENERAL USE CASE CANVAS

Problem to Solve Use Case Description

USE CASE NAME Predictive Maintenance

Unplanned downtime due to equipment failures Implement an AI-driven predictive maintenance solution DEPARTMENT Operations
increases costs and disrupts production schedules to monitor asset health, detect early warning signs of
failure, and optimize maintenance intervals
INTERNAL
INTERNAL EXTERNAL

OBJECTIVE & KEY RESULTS – STRATEGIC FIT

Business Objective Key Results OKR Accountability Strategic Fit

Improve operational efficiency and ✓ 25% reduction in downtime within ROLE Operations Manager
reduce unplanned downtime to the first year
increase overall productivity and ✓ 15% reduction in overall
NAME Jennifer Johnson
cost savings across the maintenance costs
organization ✓ 20% improvement in MTBF with
optimized maintenance scheduling GROUP Operations Dept. LO 4.1 HI

BUSINESS IMPACT USER DESIRABILITY TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY

Aligns with operational efficiency by reducing downtime, AI-driven insights give maintenance teams predictability Legacy integration and data consistency pose challenges,
lowering repair costs, and extending equipment life, and reduce firefighting. A clear, user-friendly interface but proven ML models and fallback protocols ensure
freeing resources for high-impact projects. builds trust and eases skepticism. reliable performance and smooth adoption.

OVERALL SCORE 4 OVERALL SCORE 4.3 OVERALL SCORE 4.1

Executive Summary AI USE CASES 1

 STRATEGIC BUSINESS IMPACT ASSESSMENT BUSINESS IMPACT

How does the use case align to the How does the use cases generate Business change management timeframe
organization’s executive strategy? business value?

Supports operational efficiency and cost Value is realized through fewer While technical integration is 1 2 3 4 5
reduction by reducing unplanned downtime disruptions, better planning, and relatively quick, cultural adoption
and increasing asset utilization minimized emergency repair costs may take a few months to mature
LOW HIGH

SCORE 5 SCORE 4 SCORE 3

USER DESIRABILITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT USER DESIRABILITY

Who are the key personas? How appealing is the overall value What is the change resistance?
proposition for the user?

Maintenance engineers, reliability managers, Highly appealing as users benefit from Maintenance teams may be skeptical 1 2 3 4.3 5
plant supervisors, and operations executives less fire-fighting and better control initially but can be won over with
with active stakeholder involvement over scheduling and costs performance transparency and consistency
LOW HIGH

SCORE 4 SCORE 5 SCORE 4

FEASABILITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY

What are the implementation Are sufficient safeguards available? How is the AI / LLM fit?
and operational risks?

Integration with legacy systems, inconsistent Yes, existing monitoring systems, alert Suited for traditional ML. While LLMs are not 1 2 3 4 5
data quality, and false positives or missed thresholds, and maintenance protocols serve as core here, could be used for maintenance logs
predictions during early iterations checks and fallbacks while AI system matures interpretation and documentation
LOW HIGH

SCORE 3 SCORE 5 SCORE 4

Executive Summary AI USE CASES 2

DESCRIPTION OF USE CASE EXCEPTIONAL RISK INVOLVED
USE CASE
Implement an AI-driven lead scoring and sales pipeline system to help sales teams Ethical Cybersecurity FEASIBILITY
target high-potential opportunities. The AI analyzes customer data, win/loss trends,
and behavior to prioritize leads and suggest outreach strategies. Regulatory HITL ASSESSMENT

VALUE | Business or User Value Created

How does the use case play into your AI vision? What strategic advantages does it bring? Potential resulting business value

It aligns with our broader AI strategy to leverage advanced Customer experience Insights for decisions • +20% in lead-to-opportunity
analytics for data-informed decisions. By unifying disparate conversion
Increased speed Product / service quality
data sources into a single platform and providing real-time • 15% shorter sales cycle
insights, our salesforce can be empowered with predictive Reduced complexity / risk New market entry • Enhanced upselling and cross-selling
capabilities, accelerate deal closures, and strengthen
$3M annual revenue increase
customer relationships. Resource efficiency

FEASIBILITY | Ease of Implementation Score each statement from 0 (don’t agree at all) to 5 (fully agree)

Data & infrastructure Algorithms & solution Process & systems Required know-how

We have access to We know the resources that No or few processes Required technical
the required data
3 could guide us to a resolution
4 need to be changed
3 know-how is available
2

We have the required A similar problem has No or few systems Required domain
amount of data
5 already been resolved
1 have to be adjusted
2 know-how is available
2

We have the required We know our tech stack No or few organizational Required trainings can be
data quality
2 could perform reliably
2 changes need to be made
4 executed in reasonable time
4

Time to reach verified <3 4-6 7-9 10-12 >12

proof of value (PoV)
+5 pts
months
+4 pts
months
+3 pts
months
+2 pts
months
+1 pt
months 36 / 65 =SCORE
TOTAL
 AI VALUE CAPTURE

100

AI solution is
90 necessary in order
to capture value AI solution can improve
80 performance over that
provided by non-AI solutions
Full value can be
70
captured with
non-AI solutions
60 60%
55%
50 50%
45%
40 40%
35%
30 30% 30%
25% 25%
20 20% 20% 20% 20%
15%
% OF USE CASES

AI Solution A AI Solution B AI Solution C AI Solution D AI Solution E

Use Case Benefits AI USE CASES 4

 IMPACT VS. FUNCTIONAL
SPEND
500
Sales
Product engineering Software engineering
Marketing

Customer operations
400
Financial Impact ($ Million)

Product R&D
300

Use cases represent

200 Supply chain

75%
Of total annual impact of AI
Manufacturing use case implementation
Risk and compliance
Finance
100
Talent management
Corporate IT Procurement
Strategy Legal
Pricing

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Impact as Percentage of Functional Spend (%)

Use Case Benefits AI USE CASES 5

 COST & LABOR
SAVINGS

90 FTEs 97 FTEs

$8M $11.7
M
LABOR (FTEs)

WAGES ($M)

For activities that can be AUTOMATED by AI For activities that can be AUGMENTED by AI

Data entry & processing Customer support Strategic decision support Creative content development

Inventory management Marketing analytics Complex data analysis Customer relationship mgmt

Quality control Scheduling & coordination Sales forecasting & insights HR talent management

Use Case Benefits AI USE CASES 6

 CAPABILITY IMPROVEMENTS (Automation vs. Augmentation)

Cumulative cost savings Incremental productivity gain AUTOMATION plus

due to AUTOMATION due to AUGMENTATION AUGMENTATION

(high est.)
$12B (low est.) $25B $18B (low est.) $40B
(high est.) $30B (low est.) $65B
(high est.)

20% of tasks of tasks 40% 30% of tasks of tasks 60% 50% of tasks of tasks 100%
PRESENT

FUTURE
Project Primarily manual oversight of milestones, Automated progress tracking with dynamic,
Tracking relying on static Gantt charts and spreadsheets real-time dashboards and predictive alerts,
with limited real-time updates. enabling proactive adjustments.

Spreadsheet-based planning with Intelligent allocation tools that forecast

Resource occasional over- or under-allocation of demand, redistribute resources in real time,
Allocation team members and budgets. and minimize bottlenecks.

Use Case Benefits AI USE CASES 7

 Data collection Hardware
DEVELOPMENT
$30K $50K $50K $80K
COSTS DATA EXPENSES INFRASTRUCTURE

$70K – $110K $40K $60K

$90K – $140K $40K $60K

Cleaning and preprocessing Cloud services

AI frameworks and libraries Algorithm development

DEVELOPMENT &
$20K $30K $60K $90K
SOFTWARE & TOOLS TRAINING

$50K – $70K $130K –

$490K $730K $30K $40K
$190K
$70K $100K

Licensing and subscriptions Model training

Deployment costs Compliance and security

TOTAL
DEPLOYMENT & $40K $60K $25K $40K
ADDITIONAL COSTS
MAINTENANCE

$90K – $130K $50K $70K

$60K – $90K $35K $50K
Low Estimate High Estimate

Maintenance and support Training and upskilling

Cost of AI Use Case AI USE CASES 8

 As the AI solution scales over time, its
1.0

associated costs will be optimized

0.8
0.6

Initiation Stabilization & Maturity & Ongoing

Integration Surge
& Setup Efficiency Gains Optimization
0.4
0.2
0

MONTH 0 MONTH 3 MONTH 6 MONTH 9 MONTH 12 MONTH 15 MONTH 18 MONTH 21

Initial planning, Install additional Major cost spike as Tune predictive Costs start to Negotiate vendor Iterative updates to Ongoing
data readiness sensors and legacy systems and algorithms and plateau as contracts, leverage predictive models maintenance with
assessment, and integrate real- new analytics optimize data infrastructure and open-source tools, and workflow minimal overhead;
stakeholder time data feeds platforms converge pipelines processes mature and improve model automation cost curve flattens
alignment efficiency

Cost of AI Use Case AI USE CASES 9

 PAYBACK PERIOD

PAYBACK PERIOD

Total cost of AI development $250,000

=
Annual net profit from AI $200,000

15
MONTHS

29 MONTHS

Non-AI Payback Period

Months Since Use Case Development

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

Return on Investments AI USE CASES 10

 ECONOMIC VALUE ADDED (EVA)

HIGH EVA, HIGH CAPITAL UTILIZATION HIGH EVA, LOW CAPITAL UTILIZATION

30%
Task Cycle Time
$1.2M

Ultimately drives economic value to customers

Improved productivity and work performance
$2.5M $2.0M $3.2M $2.2M $1.8M $2.4M Annual Savings

25%
Predictive Quality Supply chain Fraud Dynamic pricing Personalized Operational
Maintenance control optimization detection engine marketing Efficiency 35%
Revenue
Growth

$18.2M $1.52M 20%

Employee
TOTAL EVA AVG. USE CASE EVA
Productivity

20%
Higher ROI
R&D
simulations
Enterprise
knowledge graph
Document
management
Help desk
chatbot
Meeting
summarizer
Sentiment
analysis
15%
Output Quality

$700K $900K $600K $400K $350K $500K 20%

40% Operational

Error Rates Savings

LOW EVA, HIGH CAPITAL UTILIZATION LOW EVA, LOW CAPITAL UTILIZATION

Return on Investments AI USE CASES 11

 HARD SOFT HARD VS. SOFT ROI
Based on PWC’s ROI Model for AI
Data infrastructure Change management
$400K $50K
upgrade program

$ 920K 5 FTEs
INVESTMENT

Model development Hours for employee

$250K 200
and training upskilling Benefits from model Resources to build model

Cloud computing Sessions for cross-

– X
$150K 10
fees (annual) functional alignment
$ 100K $ 120K
Uncertainty of benefits Costs of resources
RETURN

Labor costs Brand equity

$300K 10% = =
savings (annual) improvement

$ 100K $ 120K
Maintenance Project cycle time /
$200K 20% RETURN INVESTMENTS
savings (annual) reduction

=
Inventory Net promoter score
$150K 15%
optimization gains improvement
1.37 ( 137% ) ROI

Return on Investments AI USE CASES 12

 Predictive maintenance

RISK VS. REWARD

Contract processing Fraud detection

Risk Level Reward Level

0.11 USE CASE RISK : REWARD RATIO

Quality control 0.43 0.25 Customer service chatbots

Predictive maintenance 0.11

0.43
Fraud detection 0.25
0.33
Customer service chatbots 0.43

Sales forecasting 0.71

0.88 0.71
Risk scoring 0.67
arketing personalization Sales forecasting
0.67
Supply chain optimization 0.88
1.60
Talent sourcing 1.60

0.88 Marketing personalization 0.88

Quality control 0.33

Talent sourcing Risk scoring

Contract processing 0.43

Supply chain optimization

Return on Investments AI USE CASES 13

 Foundational model used YES OPEN SOURCE UNDETERMINED MODEL EVALUATION

Controls to ensure foundational model was Control over

YES NO NTH PARTY UNDETERMINED
system
not trained with prohibited or biased content
8 / 10

Provenance of the data in the training

YES NO UNDETERMINED Suitability for
set checked for permissive use
use cases
8 / 10
Modal data is de-identified,
YES NO UNDETERMINED
aggregated, and anonymized Availability of
resources
9 / 10
Model training process include
YES NO UNDETERMINED
human reinforcement
Quality of
performance
7 / 10
Change log for model published YES NO UNDETERMINED

Ease of
implementation
Independent audits or validation
YES NO UNDETERMINED
7 / 10
of model outputs

Cost
effectiveness
[IF YES] Results are shared YES NO UNDETERMINED N/A 9 / 10

User prompting
[IF YES] Frequency of validation / testing CONTINUOUS ON RELEASE ANNUALLY OTHER frequency
6 / 10

Model & Data AI USE CASES 14

 MODEL MONITORING REPORT

MODEL ACCURACY FAIRNESS SAFETY EXPLAINABILITY

MILD BIAS WHITE BOX

0.94 in sampling
Limited external
Version 2.17.4
vulnerabilities

Theta Insight

MODERATE BIAS BLACK BOX

0.89 in historical
data Requires robust
Version 5.3.0-beta
oversight

Epsilon Predict

HIGH BIAS WHITE BOX

0.92 in feature
selection Regular threat scans
Version 11.8.26
recommended

Sigma Vision

Model & Data AI USE CASES 15

 RISK IMPLICATION
RISK DESCRIPTION RISK TYPE LOW HIGH RISK LEVEL

Likelihood 4
Insufficient data
quality for training
DATA 16
Impact
4

Likelihood 4
Delayed data updates that
impact model accuracy
DATA 20
Impact
5

Likelihood 3
Algorithm bias skewing
prediction results
MODEL & BIAS 12
Impact
4

Likelihood 2
Incorrect user input PROMPT
misguiding AI outputs & INPUT
6
Impact
3

Likelihood 3
Misinterpretation of AI
recommendations
USER 9
Impact
3

Model & Data AI USE CASES 16

 APPLICATION
Optimized
Resilient fault
QUALITY detection Robust predictive
maintenance
Failure
forecast
Critical issue
prediction
Precision asset
Accurate
High-Stake Use Cases equipment
monitoring

Adaptive diagnostics
alerting system
Failure can lead to substantial downtime
or safety issues. Success can deliver
large-scale savings and performance
Downtime
gains. Smart
minimization alerts
DATA QUALITY performance
analytics
Mid-Stake Use Cases

Can provide significant operational Limited

downtime
insights. Failures or inaccuracies would be Suboptimal
analysis
maintenance
disruptive but not catastrophic.

MODEL PERFORMANCE
forecast
Unstable fault
prediction
Inefficient
Low-Stake Use Cases
anomaly
detection Underperforming
While helpful, inaccuracies or sensor analytics

underperformance are less likely to cause

major financial or operational damage.

Model & Data AI USE CASES 17

 PILOT IMPLEMENTATION DECISION POINTS

PLANNING & FEASIBILITY PILOT IMPLEMENTATION SCALE & OPTIMIZATION

2
Define objectives
Decide whether to proceed with
and scope
Conduct a broader rollout, modify the
feasibility study pilot further, or halt the initiative
Secure
stakeholder buy-in based on performance and ROI
Develop and
deploy prototype
Testing and
improvement
Evaluation and
reporting
Plan for full-scale
deployment
Implement

1
Assess technical viability, monitoring &
resource availability, and governance
alignment with strategic framework
objectives Optimize and
expand use cases
PASSING CRITERIA

DECISION POINT 1

DECISION POINT 2
> 80% < 90% > 20%

Data quality and completeness score Resource and budget alignment Improvement in targeted operational KPIs

> 70% > 20% < 18mo

Baseline model accuracy Business impact: projected ROI Payback period

Implementation AI USE CASES 18