More threat than opportunity, and the threat is front-loaded.
In matrix language, TDC sits closer to the democratized boom, the threat end of the slider, than the virtuous cycle that is the 4 this plan is built to reach. The moat is trust as delegation. Clients pay TDC to absorb the noise of marketing so they do not have to, and the moat only holds while every service line visibly delivers above what the client's own AI produces.
The raw mean of the nine line scores below is roughly 2.6, but the slider is not an average. The lines scoring 1 to 2 sit inside the shortest adaptation windows, one is already costing a retainer today, while the lines scoring 3 to 4 lean on infrastructure and bets that team-wide adoption has not caught up with yet. Potential does not move a slider. Executed process does.
The economics in one line: TDC's hourly lines lose revenue to AI compression unless repriced, its set-price lines gain margin from the same compression, and the strategy retainer anchors everything.
Both ends share exploding demand, so the only question is who keeps the value. The plan climbs TDC toward the virtuous cycle; without adaptation the work drifts down into the democratized boom.
Two questions decide whether AI grows a business or hollows it out.
Start here, before reading TDC line by line. AI does not treat all work the same. Two forces sort every industry, and every task inside it, into one of four corners. Where the work lands decides whether cheaper and faster becomes growth, protected margin, or a race to the bottom. Marketing sits in the best corner, and that position is what this whole report is built to defend.
36 industries plotted by demand response (left to right) and value capture (bottom to top). Marketing sits top-right, in the virtuous cycle.
The same 36 industries, grouped so you can see who shares each corner.
Marketing and creative strategy sits top-right, in the virtuous cycle: clients want more of it as it gets cheaper, and the judgment stays with the people who do it.
Each dot is a placement on a fixed scale, not a measured amount. On demand, left of centre means the work shrinks as it gets cheaper and right of centre means it grows. On value, left means the buyer starts doing it themselves and right means you keep it. Read down a column and compare the dots.
| industry | demand as the work gets cheapershrinksflatexplodes | who captures the valuebuyer DIYssharedyou keep it | net | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| virtuous cycleelastic demand + you keep the value | |||||
| Marketing / creative strategy | explodes | you keep it | grow | ||
| Software development | explodes | mostly yours | grow | ||
| Cybersecurity | explodes | you keep it | grow | ||
| Data science & analytics | explodes | mostly yours | grow | ||
| Drug discovery / biotech R&D | grows | you keep it | grow | ||
| Semiconductor / chip design | grows | you keep it | grow | ||
| Scientific R&D | grows | you keep it | grow | ||
| Quantitative finance | grows | you keep it | grow | ||
| Strategy consulting | grows | mostly yours | grow | ||
| efficiency dividendcapped demand + you keep the value | |||||
| Radiology & diagnostics | flat | you keep it | hold + margin | ||
| Financial audit & assurance | flat | mostly yours | hold + margin | ||
| Commercial real-estate brokerage | capped | mostly yours | hold + margin | ||
| Commercial construction | capped | mostly yours | hold + margin | ||
| Architecture | capped | you keep it | hold + margin | ||
| Civil engineering | capped | you keep it | hold + margin | ||
| Litigation & M&A law | capped | you keep it | hold + margin | ||
| Live events & festivals | capped | you keep it | hold + margin | ||
| Surgery & clinical care | capped | you keep it | hold + margin | ||
| democratized boomelastic demand + the buyer takes over | |||||
| Tutoring & test prep | explodes | leaking | boom, bypassed | ||
| Translation & localization | explodes | buyer / DIY | boom, bypassed | ||
| SMB social-media content | explodes | buyer / DIY | boom, bypassed | ||
| Basic copywriting / blog drafts | explodes | buyer / DIY | boom, bypassed | ||
| Commodity graphic design | explodes | buyer / DIY | boom, bypassed | ||
| Transcription & captioning | explodes | buyer / DIY | boom, bypassed | ||
| DIY website building | explodes | leaking | boom, bypassed | ||
| Presentation / slide design | explodes | leaking | boom, bypassed | ||
| Resume & cover-letter writing | grows | buyer / DIY | boom, bypassed | ||
| the squeezecapped demand + the buyer takes over | |||||
| Basic proofreading & copy-editing | capped | buyer / DIY | squeeze | ||
| Routine contract drafting | capped | buyer / DIY | squeeze | ||
| Rote software QA testing | capped | buyer / DIY | squeeze | ||
| Data entry & bookkeeping | capped | buyer / DIY | squeeze | ||
| Basic tax preparation | capped | buyer / DIY | squeeze | ||
| Stock photography (licensing) | capped | buyer / DIY | squeeze | ||
| Basic travel booking | shrinks | buyer / DIY | squeeze | ||
| Telemarketing / appointment setting | shrinks | buyer / DIY | squeeze | ||
| Tier-1 call centers | shrinks | buyer / DIY | squeeze | ||
The lower two corners are where reclaimed hours come from. The top two are where they should go.
Now the same two questions, asked of the 43 tasks that make up TDC's nine service lines. Read this alongside the nine service-line scores that follow: the line score is the summary, and this task map is the detail underneath it. Almost every service line spans more than one corner, which is the whole logic of the plan. Automate the drudgery in the bottom-left, hold the line where clients could self-serve, and reinvest the freed hours into the craft and growth work at the top.
43 tasks across the nine services, plotted the same way. The lower-left cloud is your reclaimable time; the top row is where it should go.
Every task, grouped by corner and tagged with its service line.
Each task is tagged with the service line it belongs to, so a single line like Copywriting or Web dev shows up in three different corners at once.
Grouped growth engine, then do better, then productize, then automate. The bottom group is where the reclaimed hours come from; the top two are where they should be spent.
| task | demand as the work gets cheapershrinksflatexplodes | who keeps the valuebuyer DIYssharedyou keep it | net | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| growth enginedo more and better, reinvest freed hours here | |||||
| Marketing strategyCampaign strategy & positioning | explodes | you keep it | growth engine | ||
| Paid adsCampaign strategy & budget allocation | grows | you keep it | growth engine | ||
| Paid adsAd copy & creative variant generation | explodes | mostly yours | growth engine | ||
| Web devBespoke website builds | grows | you keep it | growth engine | ||
| Social mediaContent ideation & campaign concepts | explodes | you keep it | growth engine | ||
| Social mediaSocial listening & trend spotting | grows | mostly yours | growth engine | ||
| CopywritingConversion & landing copy | grows | mostly yours | growth engine | ||
| VideographyMotion graphics & voiceover (AI-leveraged) | grows | mostly yours | growth engine | ||
| Cross-channelCreative & message testing (A/B) | explodes | mostly yours | growth engine | ||
| do better worksame hours, higher craft, our judgment | |||||
| VideographyOn-site filming & production | shrinks | you keep it | do better work | ||
| VideographyCreative concept & storyboarding | flat | you keep it | do better work | ||
| VideographyLong-form video editing | flat | you keep it | do better work | ||
| PhotographyBrand & on-location shoots | shrinks | you keep it | do better work | ||
| Graphic designBrand identity & logo systems | flat | you keep it | do better work | ||
| Graphic designArt direction & concepting | flat | you keep it | do better work | ||
| CopywritingBrand messaging & narrative | flat | you keep it | do better work | ||
| CopywritingLong-form drafting (blogs, articles) | grows | you keep it | do better work | ||
| Web devUX/UI design & site architecture | flat | you keep it | do better work | ||
| Marketing strategyMarket & competitor research | flat | mostly yours | do better work | ||
| productize (DIY risk)clients want a lot of it and could self-serve | |||||
| VideographyShorts/reels editing | explodes | buyer / DIY | productize (DIY risk) | ||
| VideographyShort-form clip repurposing | explodes | leaking | productize (DIY risk) | ||
| Social mediaRoutine post & caption drafting | explodes | buyer / DIY | productize (DIY risk) | ||
| Graphic designTemplated social graphics | explodes | leaking | productize (DIY risk) | ||
| Graphic designCollateral layout (quick graphics) | grows | leaking | productize (DIY risk) | ||
| PhotographyRoutine product & interior shots | grows | buyer / DIY | productize (DIY risk) | ||
| PhotographyRoutine retouching & color | grows | leaking | productize (DIY risk) | ||
| Web devRoutine landing-page building | explodes | leaking | productize (DIY risk) | ||
| Email marketingCampaign copy & template build | grows | leaking | productize (DIY risk) | ||
| automate + shiftdrudgery, collapse the time and redeploy the person | |||||
| CopywritingEditing & proofreading | flat | buyer / DIY | automate + shift | ||
| PhotographyPhoto culling & selection | capped | leaking | automate + shift | ||
| Marketing strategyKPI reporting & dashboards | capped | buyer / DIY | automate + shift | ||
| Social mediaAnalytics & reporting | capped | buyer / DIY | automate + shift | ||
| Paid adsBid & budget optimization | capped | leaking | automate + shift | ||
| Web devQA & cross-device testing | capped | buyer / DIY | automate + shift | ||
| VideographyAuto-captioning & subtitling | capped | buyer / DIY | automate + shift | ||
| Paid adsPerformance reporting | capped | buyer / DIY | automate + shift | ||
| Web devSite maintenance & content updates | capped | buyer / DIY | automate + shift | ||
| Graphic designAsset resizing & reformatting | capped | buyer / DIY | automate + shift | ||
| CopywritingSEO metadata & alt text | capped | buyer / DIY | automate + shift | ||
| Email marketingPerformance reporting | capped | buyer / DIY | automate + shift | ||
| Marketing strategyPlan documentation & formatting | capped | buyer / DIY | automate + shift | ||
| Social mediaScheduling & publishing | capped | buyer / DIY | automate + shift | ||
| Email marketingList hygiene & data management | capped | buyer / DIY | automate + shift | ||
One is the worst, four is the best, and there is no middle score. Every rating is a call, not a hedge.
| Service line | Client-DIY | Competitor speed | AI leverage | Upside | Overall | Gainspring's read | Window |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Video, shorts/reels | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | The only line already losing revenue to AI today. AI now edits shorts as well as a conventional pass, while TDC still works the way it did twelve months ago. On set-price economics, whoever edits fastest keeps the margin. | 0–6 months |
| Copywriting + captions | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | The single most AI-exposed thing TDC sells. Captions, generic blogs, and routine email copy are what consumer AI does passably for free. The 15/45 reallocation is the pricing defense; voice governance is the unclaimed upside. | 0–6 months |
| Graphic design | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | Canva's AI now sits in clients' hands. Template assembly compresses first; brand systems, print-grade craft, and art direction stay billable. It is the only line the task map leaves without a growth-engine task, so its ceiling is do-better work: art direction, brand systems, and taste. The fix is replacing the workflow, not adding AI to it. | 0–9 months |
| Paid ads | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | The platforms automate targeting, creative rotation, and bidding, shrinking the hours a client pays to manage. Value moves to budget strategy, creative strategy, and honest measurement. | 6–12 months |
| Web design + development | 4 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 3 | The sharpest competitor threat and the biggest single opportunity in one line. An AI-native shop can ship a passable brochure site in a day. TDC's Payload architecture turns web into AI-operable infrastructure, but that capability currently lives with leadership. | 0–12 months |
| Email marketing | 4 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 3 | Protected by the drag-along: once TDC owns strategy, email rides along, because it is noise the client has no interest in absorbing. Compression here is margin to reinvest in flows and segmentation, not revenue at risk. | 6–12 months |
| Video, long form | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | Capture is defensible; no AI attends a shoot or earns the trust that gets a subject on camera. IntelliScript is documented, trained, and in use, the best example of AI adopted into a workflow at TDC. AI-leveraged motion graphics and voiceover is the line's growth-engine lane. The job now is making the AI post-pipeline universal rather than champion-driven. | 6–18 months |
| Photography | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | The most physically protected line. AI cannot photograph a real jobsite, team, or aircraft. Post culling and retouch compress hours; authenticity becomes the premium worth packaging in an AI-saturated feed. | 12–24 months |
| Marketing strategy | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | The clearest opportunity in the company and the engine that pulls every other line up. Strategy, review meetings, and the Fractional CMO relationship are trust products AI does not replace. Its job now is to export that maturity to every team. | Ongoing |
The four columns are the scored factors: the client-DIY test, the competitor-speed test, AI leverage today, and opportunity upside. The line score is a call, not their average; it weighs how much of each line's standing is executed process versus unrealized potential. The standard clients judge by is "good enough," not "as good as ours," which is why the text-based services carry the shortest windows.
The scorecard says where the pressure is. The rate card says what it costs.
Every dollar figure below scales with the hours a client's scope requires. Rates are the unit price, not the bill. Figures marked est. are illustrative targets to validate against real project cards.
| Service line (score) | Standard pricing, per our agreements | Mechanic | What AI compression does | Expected gain if we execute |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shorts/reels (1) | Set-price bundles, roughly $200–$900 per set depending on the client | Set-price | The dangerous one: whoever edits fastest keeps the margin. A roughly 3 to 4 hour edit at roughly 1 hour (est.) triples throughput on the same price, and a client is already buying AI-edited post elsewhere. | Roughly 3.0x edit throughput. Per active shorts client: 2 to 3 editor hours reclaimed per set, about $500/month in recovered margin or added volume, roughly $6K/year per client (est.) |
| Copywriting + captions (2) | Written content and editorial $140/hr; social media management roughly $60–$95 per post; upstream social roughly $50–$95/hr | Hourly + per-post | Per-post and hourly copy pricing survives only if output quality visibly rises. The 15/45 reallocation is the pricing defense, not a productivity perk. | Roughly 1.5x. Per writer: 15 to 20 drafting hours/month reclaimed, about $2,100–$2,800/month of redeployable capacity, roughly $25K–$34K/year (est.) |
| Graphic design (2) | $140/hr | Hourly | Template-assembly hours compress first; brand-system and art-direction hours stay billable. The workflow replacement decides which kind of hours we sell. | Roughly 2.0x concept throughput: 16 options in the hours that used to produce 3. Per designer: about 20 hours/month shifted to art direction, about $2,800/month, roughly $34K/year (est.) |
| Paid ads (2) | $140/hr | Hourly | The platforms are automating the billable hours away regardless of what we do. The billing narrative must move to outcomes before the hour count visibly shrinks. | Roughly 1.3x. Reporting prep compresses about 5 to 8 hours/month per account load, about $700–$1,100/month redirected to insight and creative strategy, roughly $8K–$13K/year (est.) |
| Web design + development (3) | $140/hr. A basic 60 to 80 hour build bills $8,400–$11,200 | Hourly | The biggest single number at risk: at 25 to 35 AI-assisted hours (est.) the same build bills $3,500–$4,900, a gap of roughly $4,900–$6,300 per build that becomes either TDC's value-priced margin or a competitor's undercut. | Roughly 2.3x build throughput (60 to 80 hrs to 25 to 35 hrs). Each build frees 35 to 45 hours, about $4,900–$6,300 of capacity; at one build per month, roughly $59K–$76K/year (est.) |
| Email marketing (3) | Roughly $60–$140/hr depending on scope | Hourly | A small line protected by the drag-along. Compression here is margin to reinvest in flows and segmentation, not revenue at risk. | Roughly 1.5x drafting throughput. About 5 to 10 hours/month reclaimed across the brand portfolio, about $700–$1,400/month reinvested, roughly $8K–$17K/year (est.) |
| Video, long form (3) | $210/hr production and post; roughly $800–$3,400 per video; TV ads $4,000–$5,000; bumper ads $300–$800 | Hourly + set-price | Post compression on set-price videos is pure margin; production hours are physically defensible and never touched. All savings come from the back end. | Roughly 1.4x post throughput. The AI assembly cut trims 4 to 6 hours per video, about $840–$1,260 per video at $210/hr; at two videos/month, roughly $20K–$30K/year (est.) |
| Photography (3) | $210/hr | Hourly | Post compression frees hours for capture, the billed hours clients most value and AI can least replace. | Roughly 1.3x. AI cull and retouch trims 2 to 3 post hours per shoot, about $420–$630 per shoot at $210/hr reinvested in capture; at four shoots/month, roughly $20K–$30K/year (est.) |
| Marketing strategy (4) | Marketing reviews and Fractional CMO retainers of $1,600–$10,000 per quarter; most clients between $2,100 and $2,650 | Retainer | Untouched by compression, and it drags email and social along with it. This is the revenue anchor every other line's adaptation protects. | Roughly 1.2x strategist capacity. Research and reporting compression frees 8 to 10 hours/month per strategist for depth and the Big Picture segment. The payoff is retention of the anchor retainers (est.) |
The three mechanics, in one line each:
Hourly lines ($140/hr across most of the stack): AI compression directly shrinks the invoice, so every hourly line must either move toward value and package pricing or visibly reinvest reclaimed hours into scope and quality.
Set-price lines (shorts sets, per-video pricing, TV and bumper ads): compression is pure margin. Speed converts to profit immediately, and a slower shop bleeds first. This is why shorts/reels sits in Do First.
Retainers and subscriptions (quarterly strategy retainers; annual budgets billed as twelve equal monthly fees): the anchor. Not compressed by AI, but every annual renewal is where clients push to reprice compressed line items, so the Overcommunication Play has to land before the renewal conversation does.
Premium-rate clients (up to $165/hr standard and $265/hr for video) widen every number above. This report deliberately does not attach a per-line annual revenue split; that figure is unconfirmed here and belongs in the validation register, pulled straight from invoicing.
The slider says where TDC sits; the matrix says what to do about it, and in what order. Every service line is placed by urgency, how short its adaptation window is, and importance, how much revenue and moat ride on it. Everything in Do First scores 1 to 3, and that top-left quadrant is the reason the slider reads 2 of 4. Clear it and both pictures move at once.
Every service line is tested against two forces: the client can do it themselves, and a faster competitor moves first. It is not hypothetical. In one client meeting a board discussed a dedicated GPT to write their own emails. A current client, Middlebrook Wealth, is shooting video abroad and having a third party AI-edit it, in part because they view TDC's pricing as too expensive. That is the shorts threat landing on a real retainer, right now.
The competitor threat is ultimately a pricing-anchor threat: even where TDC's quality is clearly better, an AI-native competitor's quote resets what the client believes the work should cost. Repricing is only a threat while somebody else is doing it.
Replace the old workflow with AI. Do not add AI to the old workflow.
Each plan has two postures. Adapt and Survive changes the process now and defends the revenue. Thrive ups the game. Together they become the working sessions that turn recommendations into infrastructure.
| Service line (score) | Adapt + Survive, change the process now | Thrive, up the game | Window |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shorts/reels (1) | Build the AI-first pipeline in 90 days (IntelliScript, Opus Clips, and the bake-off; validate roughly 3 to 4 hr to roughly 1 hr, est.). Repackage and reprice volume bundles. Take a competitive package back to the at-risk retainer directly. | Proactive retention: bring the new economics to clients before they find the alternative. Win on volume, more shorts per retainer at the same price. | 0–6 months |
| Copywriting + captions (2) | Make the 15/45 workflow mandatory on every card. Build voice production assets (Prompt Instructions and Un-AI-ify) for every brand. Move writer hours to taste. Prove the reallocation on comparable card data. | Sell voice governance as an owned, billable asset. Narrate the upgrade in every Big Picture segment. | 0–6 months |
| Graphic design (2) | Roll Claude, Higgsfield, and Recraft to everyone who touches design. Write brand source-of-truth documents. Replace the workflow, 16 options in one shot, hours to curation. Keep brand systems and print human-led. | Redefine the designer's job: define the identity, direct the volume, exercise the judgment. Sell taste, push clients past the safe pick. | 0–9 months |
| Paid ads (2) | Lean into platform automation and reposition value as strategy and measurement. Compress reporting prep with AI. Generate ad creative in volume against brand documents. | Overcommunicate the watchdog role. Shift the billing narrative toward outcomes and strategy. | 6–12 months |
| Web design + development (3) | Commit the AI-native architecture and train 2 to 3 additional operators. Design in the working medium with parallel live variations. Run the pilot site validating 60 to 80 to 25 to 35 hrs (est.). Reprice basic builds as the retainer on-ramp. | Ship a human version and a machine version of every site. Build micro-tools with agents. Sell the architecture story in every proposal. | 0–12 months |
| Email marketing (3) | Standardize AI drafting per brand, no email from scratch. Reinvest reclaimed hours in flows, segmentation, deliverability. Preempt budget pressure with results reporting. | Deepen the drag-along, keep email a responsibility the client never absorbs. Narrate the trade in monthly reviews. | 6–12 months (margin, not defense) |
| Video, long form (3) | Require IntelliScript proficiency for every editor, measured on real cards. Run the formal post-pipeline bake-off. Rebuild post AI-first, the assembly cut comes before editor hours, production untouched. | Redirect saved hours to story and polish. Show the upgrade in the Big Picture segment. | 6–18 months |
| Photography (3) | Replace the post workflow, AI first-pass cull and retouch on every shoot. Reinvest post hours in capture. Offer AI filler imagery ourselves to keep that spend in the retainer. | Package authenticity as the premium. Put photographer hours into taste. | 12–24 months |
| Marketing strategy (4) | Standardize AI research and prep. Invert the workflow, AI drafts complete directions, strategists make the call. Solve capacity with trained, trusted color teams. Defend deep thinking time. | Run the Overcommunication Play in every Big Picture. Sell the brave option. | Ongoing, must lead |
Every tool is an efficiency tool operating inside a defined process. TDC remains in complete and total control, with human beings exercising creative and strategic judgment. Company-billed team accounts only, never personal logins, so client work stays under commercial data-protection terms.
| Layer | Tool | Who runs it | Cost + status |
|---|---|---|---|
| AI workspace + source of truth | Notion AI, AI Memory, the prompt library | Everyone | In place, live |
| General AI + agents | Claude (Team plan) | Everyone; premium seats for web and design power users | About $25/seat/mo standard plus about $100/mo premium seats, about 13 seats near $550/mo per the adoption plan. Drafted, roll out in Sprint 1. |
| Image generation | Recraft + Higgsfield | Design + content | In evaluation, pick in Sprint 1 |
| Design production | Canva AI | Design, plus client template handoffs | In place |
| Video post, long form | DaVinci Resolve IntelliScript + AI tools | Every editor | In place (Studio licenses owned), make universal |
| Video post, shorts/reels | Opus Clips + the Sprint 1 bake-off winner | Every editor | In play, formalize in Sprint 1 |
| Web | Payload + monorepo + coding agents | Web team, plus 2 to 3 newly trained operators | In evaluation, commit in Sprint 1 |
| Platform AI drafting against per-brand voice systems | Email + strategists | In place, standardize in Sprint 2 | |
| Paid ads | Platform automation (Meta/Google) + AI-compressed reporting | Ads | In place, lean in |
| Measurement | Weekly scorecards + a per-person adoption dashboard | Leadership | To build, Sprint 3 |
The net new spend is roughly one meaningful subscription layer, Claude Team, an image-generation pick, and a shorts tool, against savings measured in shifted hours on every service line. The cost conversation is a rounding error next to the repricing conversation.
Measure behavior, not attendance. A KPI without a name attached is a wish.
Six numbers, reviewed on the same weekly scorecard rhythm TDC already runs. Every number gets exactly one directly responsible individual: not a committee, not a department.
| KPI | Today | Target | DRI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Per-person AI prompt usage | Roughly 71 to 78% team-wide; per-person unconfirmed | 90%+ team-wide, no individual below 75% by Day 90 | Megan |
| Prompt library contributions | Roughly 0 to 1/week, from the same few builders | 2+/week, drawn from all four color teams | Megan |
| Time-per-deliverable delta | Unmeasured | Blog 15/45, shorts about 1 hr/edit (est.), site build 25 to 35 hrs (est.) | Megan |
| AI-pipeline coverage | Champion-driven and uneven | 100% of captions, blogs, and shorts by Day 90 | Mike |
| Overcommunication coverage | 0% | 100% of Big Picture meetings from the next cycle onward | Mike |
| Revenue per delivered hour | Unmeasured | Rising on shorts and web builds by the Quarter 2 re-score | Mike |
As an organization, Mike is responsible for this rebuild, working directly with TDC's marketing, design, content, and web strategists to create the infrastructure improvements each department needs. The Adapt and Survive steps become working sessions, turned into processes, tools, and infrastructure, not left as recommendations on a page.
Every commitment above, plotted as cards and grouped by sprint. Drag cards across columns as the working sessions land them, and open any card for the why, the what, and the definition of done.
Roll out Claude Team. Pick the image-generation tool. Run the shorts/reels bake-off and stand up the AI-first pipeline. Commit the AI-native web architecture and train 2 to 3 operators. Make the 15/45 copy workflow mandatory.
Standardize AI email drafting against per-brand voice systems so no email starts from scratch. Reinvest reclaimed hours in flows, segmentation, and deliverability. Reposition paid ads value toward strategy and measurement.
Build the per-person adoption dashboard with names attached. Feed it into the weekly scorecard and the six KPIs, so TDC can manage the gap between its heaviest and lightest AI users.
Strategy must lead. Integrate AI at the hub of every operating flywheel, so the way TDC describes how the company runs matches the way it actually runs. The step after this report is where the next phase begins.
Every recommendation on this page moves work off a person and onto a system. That is the point. But the people doing that work did not just have a task list. They had a craft, a reputation, and a sense of what they were good at. Move the task and you move all three.
This section is not a morale report and it is not a prediction about TDC. It is benchmark data, and it is here so nobody is surprised. The pattern below is consistent enough across roles that you can anticipate who will be energized by this plan and who will quietly resent it, before you start.
Four clusters, drawn from the emotions respondents actually selected. Most people picked five or more, and 77% chose at least one positive and one negative.
Energized 41% · Conflicted 35% · Disoriented 12% · Resentful 12%. The largest group is not opposed to AI. It is genuinely torn about it, and torn is a state you can work with if you name it out loud.
Answers to a direct question about professional identity, not about tools.
Amplified 49.0% · Redefined 27.4% · Destabilized 13.9% · Diminished 5.0% · Unchanged 3.2%. Only 3% report no change at all. Whatever else this plan does, it will change how people describe their own job.
Respondents selected their concerns about AI's impact on their work. The ranking is the useful part.
The fear is not redundancy. It is being handed the savings as extra work. If the reclaimed hours are not visibly reinvested, this plan reads to staff as a speed-up. That is the single most important communication decision in the rollout.
Share reporting significant burnout, same survey, two consecutive years.
Up 11 points in one year, with 26.2% very or completely burned out. Career optimism fell from 54.8% to 48.7% over the same period. Meanwhile 82% say AI makes them at least moderately better at the job. Both are true at once, and that combination is what burns people out.
Reaction tracks with how much of the role was craft that AI now touches, and with how far the person is from the decision. Use this to decide who needs a conversation before the rollout, not after.
| Who | What the benchmark shows | What that means for the rollout |
|---|---|---|
| Hands-on creative roles | 63% overwhelmed by the pace, 61% tired, 61% expect to do more for the same pay. The most strained group in the data. | Highest risk of quiet resentment. Give them the reclaimed hours back visibly and let them choose where those hours go. |
| Research and analysis roles | 51% anxious about job security; 36% specifically fear losing the job to AI. Data and analytics roles are highest at 38%. | These are the roles where the fear is most concrete. Name what stays human before naming what gets automated. |
| Early-career staff | 27% report a destabilized professional identity, the highest of any seniority level. | They were still forming a craft when the craft changed. They need a new definition of what good looks like, not reassurance. |
| Owners and senior leaders | Only 15% report job-security anxiety, and they rate the field far more positively than their own staff do. | Leadership will systematically underestimate how this feels below them. Do not read your own enthusiasm as consensus. |
A short internal pulse survey runs before the first workflow ships, then again at 90 days, then twice a year. Four questions: what changed about your role, how you feel about it, what you gave up, and where the freed time actually went.
The results go to leadership unfiltered and get reviewed alongside the KPI table earlier in this report. If burnout rises while throughput rises, the plan is working on paper and failing in the room, and the sequence gets adjusted.
The most common failure in this entire engagement is not a technical one. It is a company that hits its efficiency targets, quietly converts the gain into more output per person, and discovers a year later that the people it most needed to keep have already started looking. Naming that risk in the plan is how you avoid it.
Benchmark figures are from the second annual State of Tech Work survey by Noam Segal and Lenny Rachitsky, published July 2026. The respondents are technology workers, so treat the numbers as a directional benchmark rather than a forecast for this business. The pulse survey described above produces the real numbers.
Identify and Report produce everything on this page: the scores, the economics, the KPIs, the named owners, and the sequenced roadmap. That is a complete plan on its own.
Build and Shift turn that plan into working infrastructure. Those steps become the workflows, tools, training, and controls that run the plan, and the recovered capacity moves into stronger judgment, quality, and higher-value work.
See how an engagement works