Org Design & Accountability Agent
Finds the work nobody owns, and the work two people both think they own
6 of 8 tasks need attention.
8 tasks checked. 6 flagged. The largest gap is 25 days.
Start with Run the security audit. - has the most flagged.
Whether the right person owns a task is a management decision; the list only shows missing or doubled owners.
Why rows were flagged
- Overdue and not done50%
- No accountable person25%
- More than one accountable person25%
Value flagged by Accountable
- -2
- Karim / Dana1
- Rana1
- Dana1
- Rana and Omar1
Items to act on, worst first
| Item | Accountable | Value | Days overdue | Why |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run the security audit | - | 3 | 25 | No accountable person, Overdue and not done |
| Update the pricing page | - | 2 | 0 | No accountable person |
| Renew the office lease | Karim / Dana | 3 | 20 | More than one accountable person, Overdue and not done |
| Close the Q2 books | Rana | 3 | 10 | Overdue and not done |
| Plan the offsite | Dana | 1 | 15 | Overdue and not done |
| Send the investor update | Rana and Omar | 1 | 0 | More than one accountable person |
What to do this week
- Resolve Run the security audit first: it is the most urgent on the list.
- Fix the data or the status on every flagged row, then re-run.
- Re-run this check every time the list changes, before it reaches a decision.
Do
- Fix the highest-risk item first, then run the check again on fresh data.
Don't
- Don't act on one row alone: open the source record first.
How to improve
- Add more detail per row (owner, date, source) so the next report can trace each item.
- Add a second period of data so the next report can show whether things are improving.
Demo
Overview
An org chart shows who reports to whom and tells you nothing about whether the work has an owner. Every tool in this space draws the boxes and assumes the structure is right.
This agent tests it. It maps each role's stated responsibilities against the work the organisation actually does, then reports the four failures that cost real money: work no role owns, work two roles both claim, a responsibility resting on one person who cannot be replaced, and a decision with no named decider — which is why the same argument keeps returning to the same meeting.
It also follows the cascade. An objective at the top that nothing below is accountable for is an objective that will not happen, and it is visible only when you read the levels against each other rather than one at a time.
It describes structure and never people. No performance judgements, no recommendations about individuals, no suggestion that a role should be removed — because a report that reads as a redundancy list is a legal problem, and because the finding is almost always the design rather than the person.
Benefits
You learn what nobody owns
Before it fails, rather than in the incident review afterwards.
Resignations stop being crises
Because the responsibilities resting on one person were written down while they were still there.
Meetings stop relitigating
A decision with a named decider is decided once.
What it does
Finds work with no owner
The gap between two roles that nobody notices until something fails in it. A chart cannot show this; it draws people, not work.
Finds work with two owners
Where both roles believe the other handles it. The commonest cause of a task that silently never happens.
Names the single points of failure
The responsibility one person holds alone. Every organisation has several and can rarely name them before a resignation.
Follows the cascade from the top
An objective at the top with nothing accountable beneath it will not happen, and that is only visible reading the levels against each other.
Finds decisions with no decider
Why the same argument returns to the same meeting every month.
Describes structure, never people
No performance judgement, no recommendation about any individual. The finding is almost always the design.
What this changes
What this changes about your week
- It takes over
- Working out which work has an owner, which has two, and which rests on one person.
- Done today by
- Nobody, until something fails in a gap or somebody resigns.
- How often
- After growth, before a reorganisation, and after every recurring failure.
- Typical manual effort
- Interviewing every manager to establish who owns what is weeks.
Why People and hiring in particular. Org chart tools draw the boxes and assume the structure is right. None will tell you that nobody owns refunds, that two people each think the other handles onboarding, or that one person is the only one who can close the month.
Runs unattended
Started by you or by an event, and it finishes on its own. Nothing waits for someone to be at a desk.
The same standard every time
The two-hundredth item is held to the bar the first one was. Consistency is the part people cannot sustain.
It cannot act on its own
Org Design & Accountability Agent has no path to sending, spending or committing. That limit is why its output is safe to act on.
How it runs
This agent runs server-side through the PROMIVO runtime. Each run is logged step by step and every tool call is permission-checked before it executes.
- 1InputValidated against the agent input schema
- 2Modelclaude-opus-5 with automatic fallback
- 3Toolssearch_knowledge, extract_structured_data
- 4PermissionsRuns READ actions automatically; anything higher waits for approval
- 5OutputStructured result matching the output schema
- 6LoggingTokens, duration and every step recorded
Requirements
Integrations
No integrations required.
Before you start
- Your roles and reporting lines
- What each role is responsible for
- The work the organisation actually does, and its objectives
- Requires the All-Access plan or higher
Use cases
After growth
Roles that made sense at fifteen people rarely still cover the work at forty.
Before a reorganisation
What the current design actually fails at, before redrawing it.
A recurring failure
Trace it to the gap in ownership that keeps producing it.
Succession planning
Which responsibilities have exactly one person behind them.
Pricing
All-Access
Billed monthly through your PROMIVO subscription. Cancel at any time.
Runs consume your plan allowance for agent executions and tokens. See plan limits
FAQ
Will it recommend removing roles?
No, and it will refuse if asked. A report that reads as a redundancy list is a legal problem for you, and the finding is almost always the design rather than the person holding it.
Does it assess people?
Never. It reads roles and responsibilities, not individuals. It does not know who is good at their job and does not try to infer it.
What does it need?
Your roles, who reports to whom, and what each is responsible for — however roughly written. The rough version is usually where the gaps show most clearly.
How is this different from an org chart tool?
A chart renders the structure you give it. This tests that structure against the work and tells you where it does not hold. Those are opposite jobs.
Reviews
Reviews open once customers have run this agent.
Need this agent to work differently?
Tell us what to change and our team will scope a customised version for your business.
Customize this agent