CopilotForgeDraft

Catalogue › AI Centre of Excellence › coe-operating-model

CoE operating model

Designs how an AI Centre of Excellence runs - a business-owned structure with sponsor, lead, core team, four Champion roles and central AI enablement support, its shape by edition, the collaboration space, the intake-to-delivery flow and a phased launch. Use when a charter is agreed and the CoE now needs people, routes and a workable flow, or when an existing CoE has become a bottleneck.

Department
AI Centre of Excellence
Lifecycle
Mobilise, Scale, Improve
Maturity
adopter, builder, scaler, ai-enterprise
Risk tiers
0, 1, 2, 3, 4
Platforms
platform-neutral
Editions
starter, scale, enterprise
Reviewers
design-authority
Status
draft
Copilot Cowork
AI Centre of Excellence plugin for Copilot Cowork, or this skill on its own: Download SKILL.md
Licence
CC BY 4.0, by Simon Foote

Purpose

The charter says what the CoE is for; the operating model says how work moves through it and who does what. This skill designs the CoE team, chooses a central, hub-and-spoke or federated shape that fits the organisation's size, and maps the route an idea takes from intake through the opportunity lifecycle to the right delivery route. Operating models fail when the CoE tries to build everything centrally and becomes a queue, or when it federates before there are shared standards to federate.

When to use

When not to use

Questions to ask first

  1. How many business units run their own priorities, and do they have people who could act as spoke leads?
  2. Where are ideas arriving today (email to IT, Teams chats, Champions, makers building directly), and how many per month?
  3. Which delivery routes exist now: individual Copilot use, published prompts, agents built by makers, partner builds, automation, pro-code?
  4. How much CoE capacity is real, in roles and days per week, not aspirations?
  5. Which existing teams (IT service desk, architecture, information security, change) must the flow connect to?
  6. Which business unit benefits most and will own the CoE, and what can a central AI enablement function offer it?

Required inputs

Where the inventory is missing, design the flow anyway and make "find what already exists" the first action of the first month. Mark capacity figures [To confirm] rather than assuming them.

Decision framework

Choose the shape from the edition and number of business units, then check it against the readiness tests.

ShapeTypical editionChoose whenNot yet if
AI working groupStarterOne business unit, few ideas, little internal build capabilityIdeas are arriving faster than the group can triage
Business-owned CoE with central enablement supportScaleSeveral departments, steady flow of ideas, some makersNo business unit will own it and give a lead real time
Hub and spokeScale to EnterpriseTwo or more business units with their own priorities and a CoE lead eachShared intake criteria and risk tiers are not yet stable
FederatedEnterpriseSpokes run intake and tier 0-2 release under hub standards; hub runs tier 3-4 assurance and the portfolioSpokes lack trained reviewers or a shared register

Staff each CoE from the business unit that benefits. Sizes are typical starting points, scaled to the edition.

RoleHeld byDoes
Executive sponsorBusiness executiveFunds, decides priorities, removes blockers, drives adoption
CoE leadBusiness manager in the owning unitRuns the backlog, the cadence and the scorecard
Core team (often three to five)Business people with process, knowledge and delivery skillsAssess, build or commission, deploy and measure
Champions networkVolunteers with agreed time, in four rolesKnowledge champion keeps content owned and current; process champion spots opportunities and measures benefit; adoption champion promotes use and shares success stories; AI champion supports agent testing and experimentation
Central AI enablementSpecialist function serving every CoEAdvises, coaches, governs and provides technical specialists; never owns the CoE

Route every idea by the outcome of suitability and risk tier.

RouteTypical risk tierWho deliversCoE involvement
Process change or trainingNot applicableThe owning teamRecords the outcome in the backlog
Adoption scenario (individual Copilot use)0The team, helped by ChampionsPublishes the scenario
Shared prompt, Cowork task or team agent1Business maker with named ownerLight registration
Organisational agent or automation2Makers or partner with central enablement supportFull intake, reviewer gates
Business-critical or external solution3-4Specialist team or partnerFormal assurance and executive acceptance

Launch in phases, moving on only when the exit items are met. Durations are typical, not commitments.

PhaseTypical timingExit items
EstablishMonth 1Sponsor confirmed, lead and core team named, collaboration space set up
FoundationMonth 2Backlog live, knowledge asset register started, first opportunities framed
DeliverMonths 3-4Quick wins live, first agents or automations deployed, value measured against baseline
ScaleMonth 5 onwardsPatterns reused by other teams, wider rollout, adoption growing

Practitioner approach

Start from the flow, not the organisation chart. Draw the opportunity lifecycle - Identify, Assess, Prioritise, Build, Deploy, Measure, Improve - across the page, and for each stage write who does the work today, who should do it, and what leaves the stage. Lay the six pillars (opportunity management, knowledge management, agent development, automation, adoption and change, governance) against it, so each stage has a pillar that owns its method and the CoE governs once and repeats everywhere.

Design intake first. Give the organisation one front door that asks for the business owner, the problem, the expected outcome and who is affected. The rule is simple: no backlog entry, no project. Nothing is resourced unless it sits in the backlog with an owner, a priority, an estimated value, a return estimate and a status.

Then design triage and routing. Most ideas should leave quickly: to a process fix, training, an adoption scenario, a published prompt or a team-owned tier 1 agent. Only tier 2 and above should pass through full assurance. A CoE that applies tier 3 controls to everything is the commonest reason makers go around it.

Now staff it, using the structure table. Ownership sits with the benefiting business unit; the central AI enablement function supports as advisor, coach, governance and technical specialist. Give each Champion one of the four defined roles, so nobody is a vague "AI enthusiast", and agree their time with their manager. Champions feed and support; they do not approve or own high-risk solutions. Record time honestly, and borrow specialist roles from partners first.

Set up the collaboration space before the first meeting, using tools the organisation already runs. A simple structure works: a general area for announcements with a gallery of live agents and automations; an opportunities area holding the backlog board; areas for knowledge management (with the knowledge asset register), agent development, automation and governance; and a success stories area where value is shared. Visible work stops the CoE becoming a private queue.

Choose the shape using the decision framework. Hub and spoke is right when business units run their own priorities and each can name a CoE lead; federation is earned when shared criteria, tiers and one register have run for several cycles.

Plan the launch in the four phases, and do not start Deliver until the backlog and knowledge register exist. Connect the model to the organisation-wide operating model on the ai-operating-model template, and write down what will trigger a redesign, such as a new business unit or a doubling of intake. The aim is business capability supported by AI.

Outputs

Microsoft platform considerations

Where makers build agents in Copilot Studio or automations in Power Platform, the operating model should map routes to environment zones (personal productivity, team, organisational) so the platform enforces what the flow describes. Microsoft's zoned governance guidance and the CoE Starter Kit describe tooling for inventory and nurture; check current capability in references/sources.md before committing to a component.

Adoption considerations

The model must make the easy path the safe path. Publish the front door, the typical time to a decision and examples of ideas that went each route. Link the four Champion roles to champions:champion-programme-design, which owns recruitment, time agreements and recognition; Champion contribution is recognised there, never used to judge individual performance. Use the success stories area to show peers real results.

Knowledge considerations

Make knowledge ownership part of intake for anything at tier 1 or above: which sources the solution will use and who owns them. Keep a knowledge asset register in layers (policies and standards, procedures, templates and guidance, FAQs and lessons learned, then the agents and automations built on them), each item with an owner, a review date, version control and a classification. Weak knowledge is a routing outcome in its own right, sending the idea to fix content first; knowledge-management:knowledge-grounding-standards owns the standard.

Security and privacy considerations

The flow must place the security-privacy review before release from tier 2, with time for it built into the plan. Agents shared beyond their original audience re-enter the flow, because reach changes the tier.

Responsible AI considerations

Route anything that informs decisions about people, money, safety or rights to tier 3 consideration, whatever its technical simplicity, and record who holds human accountability for its outputs.

Evaluation requirements

The model should name where evaluation happens (before release from tier 2, using m365-agents:agent-testing) and who signs the evidence. evaluation-quality:ai-evaluation-strategy owns the standard.

Value measures

Measure the flow, not just the output: ideas received, time from intake to decision, share routed to adoption or process fixes, and solutions released with an owner and baseline. Report at team level through ai-centre-of-excellence:coe-kpi-framework, owned by the CoE lead.

Scale notes

Starter

An AI working group triages ideas from one shared list in a single shared space. Champion roles may be combined in one or two people. Most ideas route to adoption scenarios, process fixes or partner help. No spokes, no formal portfolio.

Scale

A small core team with business representatives runs weekly triage and monthly steering, a single register, and reviewer gates from tier 2. Consider spokes once two business units each have a willing lead.

Enterprise

Hub and spoke or federated: each business unit runs its own CoE, owning intake and tier 0-2 decisions under hub standards; the hub runs tier 3-4 assurance, the portfolio, shared patterns and one register across units, and the central AI enablement function serves every spoke.

Hand-offs

Reviewer gates

For organisations with tier 2 and above solutions, design-authority:platform-fit-review should challenge the routing table for routes that send complex work to unsupported platforms, and the challenge and response are recorded in the steering decision log.

Failure modes

Sources

references/sources.md in this skill lists the source records behind this skill, what each is authoritative for, how volatile it is and what you may do with it. Product availability, licensing, limits and preview status change often, so check the current source before stating them, and cite what you used.

Never

Source records for this skill

Microsoft Copilot Studio guidance documentation

Power Platform CoE Starter Kit

Microsoft Copilot adoption resources

Become a Champion (Microsoft Adoption)

Implement a zoned governance strategy (Copilot Studio guidance)

Credit

This skill was created by Simon Foote as part of CopilotForge, licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Credit the author when you share or adapt it.