Scope the external assessment
to the teams that can’t produce usage in-house

Written by Kazuo Yutani, Representative of Metamorphose LLC. Observations from PMO work on what happens after generative AI goes live at financial institutions and corporate teams. Metamorphose offers the Metamon generative-AI usage diagnostic; this article is our thinking on how to scope one, and it applies equally to another provider’s assessment or an in-house effort.

Don’t commission an external assessment for the whole company

Logs aren’t available. IT says, “we can give you seat counts.” The floor says, “we’re using it.” The blank in the renewal case doesn’t fill.

Run a company-wide survey at this point and you’ll collect impressions easily. Cases where it also produces a usage definition that can go into an approval are rare. Deciding to outsource the assessment doesn’t help either if the target is still “the whole company” — it returns the same blank.

Cutting the renewal target itself is a separate article. This one covers only one decision: whether a team that can’t produce numbers in-house goes into an external assessment.

The first thing to cut is not the vendor. It is the scope you measure. Teams that can already answer who / for what / how often are not outsourced. Only teams that can’t are in scope.

Your internal state before outsourcing, and whether the result can go into an approval

Internal state before outsourcing	Whether the output can go into an approval
Target teams undecided (“company-wide” still on the table)	Thick report, few lines usable for a renewal decision
Only one of who / for what / how often can be answered in-house	Answerable items use internal numbers; only the rest is outsourced — easy to combine in one table
Target teams and the “unanswerable items” fit on one line	Usage for the cut scope goes straight into the approval as a line item

Outsource with “the whole company” as the target and the deliverable tends to be a general-picture report. What the renewal case wants is numbers for the teams you cut.

What goes outside — only the teams that can’t answer

The way to cut scope is the same axis as cutting renewal scope. The assessment is the measuring work that happens after the cut.

• Teams that can answer stay out: if who / for what / how often can be answered on the spot, put internal numbers into the approval. Don’t outsource.
• Only teams that can’t go in: no logs, no task name, no weekly count. That is the assessment’s scope.
• Don’t put the whole company in at once: if the target is still company-wide, cut scope first. If you can’t cut, it is easier to hold the assessment order too.

The metrics themselves are covered in a separate article on the three adoption metrics. This article is only about sending outside the scope you can’t produce in-house.

If you use an external assessment, it is easier to run after the cut (our Metamon works on the same premise). Whether it is another provider or in-house measurement, “only the teams that can’t answer” goes into an approval more easily than “everyone at once.”

What you hand over — not a plan document

Ordering an assessment does not require a plan document. What you can write in advance is the team name and the item you can’t answer in-house today (which of who / for what / how often). Product name and seat count can be attached if known, or covered verbally in the first conversation.

There is no need to hand over a company-wide sheet of impressions first. What the approval wants is numbers for the teams you cut.

---

References
Cutting renewal scope: A renewal case with no usage number
Our service: Metamon (generative-AI usage diagnostic)

This article is a general framing, not legal, regulatory, or contractual advice. Decisions on renewals, budgets, and contracts follow your own internal rules.