Organisation design review
Assesses the current structure against stated design principles, highlighting spans and layers that merit closer scrutiny. Provides evidence for discussions about structural change.
— Organisation & Workforce
Assesses spans of control, organisational layers and managerial load to produce an evidence-backed diagnostic of reporting structures and their likely effects on decision speed and cost.
1–2 weeks → ~15 minutes
For one complete, review-ready pass
No coding required
— USE CASES
Assesses the current structure against stated design principles, highlighting spans and layers that merit closer scrutiny. Provides evidence for discussions about structural change.
Identifies single-report managers, narrow spans and potentially excessive layers that may contribute to management cost. Makes the supporting counts explicit without treating every flagged role as unnecessary.
Highlights overloaded managers, deep reporting chains and dual or unclear reporting lines. Explains their likely implications for decision speed and accountability.
Examines reporting relationships for ambiguity and structural inconsistencies. Distinguishes clear findings from areas where the available data limits the assessment.
— HOW IT BEHAVES
The mechanics behind this specific template — what it reads, what it calculates, and where a human stays in the loop.
Findings on the organisation in scope are written up as a document that reads like professional output, with each claim tied back to a role.
The roles land as a clean table you can sort, filter or drop straight into the deliverable.
Each role is assessed against explicit criteria you control, so the same standard is applied across the organisation in scope on every run.
The run works from org data, role documentation and headcount exports you supply, so conclusions about the organisation in scope are anchored to your evidence rather than general model knowledge.
Organisation reviews often rely on charts that show reporting relationships but obscure management burden, structural complexity and unclear accountability. Organisation design review is the typical trigger — assesses the current structure against stated design principles, highlighting spans and layers that merit closer scrutiny. Provides evidence for discussions about structural change. Get it right and the conclusion holds up in the room; get it rushed and it gets picked apart. Either way it costs roughly 1–2 weeks of experienced attention.
Skillsize turns that work into a Skill: you supply the material, and what comes back is organisation diagnostic report, with spans of control, organisational depth and managerial load analysis. What sits between input and output is the codified method: thresholds, sequencing and the points where a human confirms a call — all of it visible and editable in the Skill. In effect, 1–2 weeks of senior time compresses into ~15 minutes — and the output is comparable across clients, quarters and colleagues instead of shaped by whoever ran it.
Org Diagnostic exports as a structured SKILL.md file and is MCP-ready, so the same method runs in ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot or your own AI products. Adapt it to your methodology, and the intelligence stays yours — not locked to one vendor.
Defines a practical transformation strategy grounded in organisational plans and market evidence, with a phased roadmap, capability priorities and measures of progress.
Maps where AI can automate or support work, assesses workflow readiness and shows how roles may change, giving advisory teams an evidence-based view of adoption priorities and workforce implications.
Connects strategic priorities to workforce objectives, measures and accountable roles, producing a strategy-to-workforce map that exposes ownership gaps, concentrated responsibility and capability needs.
Assesses operating model readiness across stages, ownership and handovers, producing a stage map, governance gap assessment and clear stage-gate definitions ready to adopt.
Develops two or three organisation redesign options grounded in strategy, with clear reporting lines, structural trade-offs and a recommended option to test.
Assesses pay equity and workforce representation using anonymised, grouped data and sourced market benchmarks, identifying priority gaps, evidence-supported causes and practical actions.