CopilotForgeDraft

Catalogue › Opportunity Management › pilot-selection

Pilot selection

Chooses which AI opportunities to pilot and designs each pilot so it can prove or disprove its value hypothesis - a representative cohort, a comparison, a fixed duration, success and stop thresholds set in advance, quality checks, risk containment and an exit plan. Use when an opportunity is ready to test with real users, when pilots keep running indefinitely, or when a pilot ended and nobody could tell whether it worked.

Department
Opportunity Management
Lifecycle
Mobilise, Deliver, Measure
Maturity
explorer, adopter, builder, scaler, ai-enterprise
Risk tiers
0, 1, 2, 3, 4
Platforms
platform-neutral
Editions
starter, scale, enterprise
Reviewers
evaluation-quality, responsible-ai
Status
draft
Copilot Cowork
Opportunity Management plugin for Copilot Cowork, or this skill on its own: Download SKILL.md
Licence
CC BY 4.0, by Simon Foote

Purpose

This skill decides which opportunities are worth piloting and designs each pilot as a fair test of its value hypothesis. A good pilot can fail: it has a representative cohort, a comparison, a fixed end date and thresholds agreed before it starts, so the result is a decision rather than an impression. Pilots usually go wrong by being chosen for enthusiasm rather than learning value, by recruiting only volunteers who would succeed with anything, by having no comparison, or by drifting on for months because nobody set a date to decide.

When to use

When not to use

Questions to ask first

  1. Which hypothesis will the pilot test, and is its disproof condition agreed?
  2. Who would the solution serve at scale, and can a pilot cohort represent them?
  3. What would we compare against: a similar group without the solution, the same group before, or both?
  4. How long must the pilot run for the primary measure to move, and when will we decide?
  5. What could go wrong for users or customers during the pilot, and how will it be contained?

Required inputs

A pilot cannot start without a measured baseline and agreed thresholds. Where they are missing, the opportunity returns to opportunity-management:value-hypothesis. Never set or adjust thresholds after the pilot has begun without recording the change and the reason.

Decision framework

Select pilot candidates with these tests. A candidate should pass all five.

TestPasses when
Learning valueThe result will change a real decision (scale, stop, fund, change pattern)
TestableA measured baseline and a primary measure that can move within the pilot period
Contained riskHarm from failure is limited, reversible and can be monitored
OwnedA business owner will act on the result, whichever way it goes
RepresentativeA cohort can be found that resembles the eventual users

Then design the pilot.

ElementGood design
CohortMixed confidence and roles, chosen with managers, not only volunteers; large enough to see the effect at team level
ComparisonA similar group without the solution, or the same group's measured baseline, ideally both
DurationLong enough for the measure to move and habits to form; a fixed end and decision date
ThresholdsSuccess, iterate and stop thresholds from the hypothesis, agreed in writing before start
Quality checksAccuracy, groundedness or output review appropriate to the pattern, sampled throughout
SupportLearning, a named contact, Champions and a feedback route
ContainmentHuman review of outputs where needed, limited reach, a way to switch off
ExitWhat happens to users, data and the solution if the pilot stops

Practitioner approach

Choose pilots for what they will teach, not for how likely they are to look good. Ask, for each candidate, what decision the result will inform and what happens if it fails. A pilot whose failure would change nothing is a demonstration, and demonstrations should be labelled as such rather than consuming pilot capacity.

Confirm the hypothesis is ready. The baseline must be measured, the primary measure collectable during the pilot, and the disproof condition agreed. If not, stop here; running a pilot without these produces opinions, and opinions favour whoever shouts loudest at the review.

Design the cohort with managers. Volunteers are useful for early feedback but are a biased sample; the eventual users include sceptics and less confident colleagues. Aim for a mix by role and confidence, and agree with managers that participants have time to learn and use the solution. Keep the cohort large enough that results can be reported at team level without exposing individuals.

Choose the comparison. The strongest is a similar group doing the same work without the solution over the same period. Where that is impractical, use the cohort's own baseline and watch for seasonal or volume changes that could explain the result. Record known confounders before you start.

Set duration and dates. The pilot must be long enough for people to form habits and for the measure to move, and short enough to keep attention. Put the decision meeting in the diary at the start, with the business owner and sponsor committed to attend.

Write the thresholds into the pilot charter: the result that means scale, the result that means iterate, and the result that means stop. Also set quality thresholds with the evaluation route, and agree that a pilot that meets value thresholds but fails quality thresholds does not count as a success.

Contain risk. Limit reach to the cohort, keep human review on outputs where the risk tier requires it, monitor for harm, and make sure the solution can be switched off quickly. Complete required reviews before the first user is involved.

Plan the exit. Users should know what happens if the pilot stops; data created during the pilot needs a retention decision. A pilot that cannot end cleanly will not be allowed to end. Then run it, collect leading indicators weekly, and hand the evidence to opportunity-management:scale-or-stop on the agreed date.

Outputs

Microsoft platform considerations

The pattern affects what the pilot can measure and contain. Individual Copilot use is visible only through aggregate reporting; agents built in Copilot Studio can be limited to a pilot audience and expose analytics; Foundry solutions can be instrumented in detail. Licence assignment for pilot cohorts and any trial entitlements are confirmed with the licensing guide or a licensing partner, never assumed. Check capability against references/sources.md.

Adoption considerations

Pilot results depend heavily on enablement. Give the cohort learning, a named contact and Champions support, and record the enablement provided so a scaled rollout can repeat it. Under-supported pilots fail for adoption reasons and are wrongly read as solution failures.

Knowledge considerations

Where the solution grounds on organisational knowledge, confirm the knowledge is current before the pilot and freeze or log changes during it, so that results reflect the solution rather than shifting content.

Security and privacy considerations

Complete the security and privacy reviews required by the risk tier before any user is involved. Tell participants what data the pilot collects and why, collect only what the measures need, and agree retention with the data protection officer.

Responsible AI considerations

Participants should know they are in a pilot and how to raise concerns. Where outputs affect customers or decisions about people, keep human review in place and include fairness or quality checks, not only speed. Pilots of tier 3 and 4 solutions need responsible-ai agreement before start.

Evaluation requirements

Agree quality thresholds and sampling with the evaluation-quality department before start, and run them throughout. Value thresholds and quality thresholds must both be met for a pilot to count as a success.

Value measures

The pilot measures the primary measure from the hypothesis against baseline and comparison, plus leading indicators, reported at team level. At portfolio level, measure the share of pilots that reach a decision on the agreed date. The AI portfolio manager owns these; never report individual participants' usage or performance.

Scale notes

Starter

One or two pilots at a time with a small cohort, the cohort's own baseline as comparison, and a decision meeting with the sponsor at a fixed date.

Scale

A pilot charter for every pilot, a comparison group where practical, and pilot capacity limited so that each pilot is properly supported.

Enterprise

Pilots in one unit are designed to be repeatable in others; the hub keeps a library of charters and results, and requires a comparison group for strategic bets.

Hand-offs

Reviewer gates

From risk tier 2, evaluation-quality agrees the quality thresholds and sampling before the pilot starts. From tier 3, responsible-ai must agree the containment and oversight design. Each finding is blocking or advisory; a blocking finding stops the pilot from starting.

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 adoption resources

Microsoft Copilot Studio guidance documentation

Microsoft Responsible AI

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.