Industry Categories icon

Assess and Prioritize Agentic AI Use Cases in Professional Services Organizations

Assess agentic AI use cases with a triage model that connects fit, guardrails, and value.

  • Determine when judgement-heavy workflows require agentic AI versus Gen AI, RPA, or redesign.
  • Understand where autonomy can be allowed and where human accountability must remain in workflows.
  • Confirm that use cases fit the firm’s economics, client expectations, and service model.

Our Advice

Critical Insight

  • In professional services, agentic AI is primarily a workflow governance decision, not just a technology decision.
  • The strongest use cases are grounded in real workflows, bounded by human review, and prioritized for business fit, delivery value, and firm readiness.
  • Firms create value when they replace isolated assessments with a consistent triage model that links workflow fit, autonomy guardrails, and proven business value.

Impact and Result

  • Teams gain a shared understanding of agentic AI concepts, vocabulary, and practical fit for professional services firms.
  • The work produces a structured set of safe, agentic use cases mapped to business capabilities and evaluated through business impact and implementation feasibility.
  • The final output is a scored, visually represented portfolio that supports confident, defensible prioritization and leadership decision-making.

Assess and Prioritize Agentic AI Use Cases in Professional Services Organizations Research & Tools

1. Assess and Prioritize Agentic AI Use Cases in Professional Services Organizations Storyboard – Determine where agentic AI fits within your firm, distinguish it from other automation tech, and prioritize the highest-value use cases.

This research gives members a practical, structured way to assess agentic AI through a professional services lens. It explains how to evaluate workflow fit, apply autonomy guardrails, connect use cases to business capabilities and value drivers, and move from scattered ideas to a defensible, prioritized portfolio. It also includes a long list of agentic use case examples, a triage model, and pilot-ready versus emerging use case views to help leadership teams make clearer investment and sequencing decisions.

2. Agentic AI Use Case Tool for Professional Services – Score and prioritize agentic AI use cases by comparing business value, implementation feasibility, agent role, and autonomy requirements.

This evaluation tool provides members with a repeatable process for turning agentic AI ideas into portfolio decisions. It helps teams define scoring criteria and assess use cases across business impact and implementation feasibility criteria. The result is a scored, visually prioritized set of opportunities that supports disciplined sequencing, clearer stakeholder alignment, and stronger readiness for pilot planning.


Assess and Prioritize Agentic AI Use Cases in Professional Services Organizations

Assess agentic AI use cases with a triage model that connects fit, guardrails, and value.

Analyst perspective

Deploy agentic AI where firms can gain leverage without creating unmanaged risk.

In professional services, agentic AI is not primarily a technology decision. It is a workflow governance decision. Professional services organizations (PSOs) do not struggle because they lack ideas on where to apply AI. They struggle because they have not yet standardized how to judge fit, assign accountability, and distinguish where autonomy is appropriate versus where Gen AI, workflow automation, or process redesign is the better solution path.

In client-facing, judgment-heavy workflow contexts, the real issue is not whether an agent can do the work but whether the firm can safely contain the agent work without disrupting its business model. Successful firms that move fastest will be the ones that anchor their AI decisions in business capabilities, apply explicit safety and suitability gates, and prioritize only the opportunities that improve delivery, economics, and trust.

In this research, we assess agentic AI through a professional services lens, using real workflow patterns, case examples, and a structured evaluation model to uncover viable opportunities. Agentic AI in PSOs should be viewed as a controlled redesign of professional workflows at a system level, not as a generic productivity experiment using point solutions. The key decision is where autonomy can be safely allowed without weakening accountability, client trust, or commercial fit. However, culture and governance capacity will dictate whether the initiatives will scale.

A picture of Kassim Dossa
Research Director, Retail Industry
Info-Tech Research Group

Kassim Dossa
Research Director, Retail Industry
Info-Tech Research Group

Executive summary

Your Challenge

CIOs are being asked to evaluate agentic AI before the boundaries of fit, autonomy, or business value are fully settled.

  • Determine when judgment-heavy workflows require agentic AI versus Gen AI, RPA, or simply redesign.
  • Understand where autonomy can be allowed and where human accountability must remain in workflows.
  • Confirm that use cases fit the firm's economics, client expectations, and service model.

As a result, use case triage is inconsistent and PSOs struggle to approve agentic AI initiatives with confidence.

Common Obstacles

Most PSOs are not blocked by a lack of use case ideas but by inconsistent evaluation conditions.

  • Use cases are framed as technology-first experiments rather than workflow decisions.
  • Autonomy and oversight thresholds are not well defined.
  • ROI, ownership, and client/service-model constraints are surfaced too late.

Until firms standardize their approach, autonomy thresholds, and authority controls, they will struggle to shift agentic AI into professional delivery contexts.

Info-Tech's Approach

When CIOs align teams to define practical AI use cases, they reduce risk and avoid stalled adoption. Info‑Tech helps you align teams around practical agentic AI use cases by:

  • Tying all potential use cases in the reference architecture to value streams and capabilities.
  • Clarifying where agentic AI fits in professional service workflows by confirming use case safety and agentic suitability.
  • Assessing and prioritizing remaining use cases across business impact and implementation feasibility dimensions.

Info-Tech Insight

Agentic AI creates value in PSOs only when firms replace isolated assessments with a consistent use case triage model that links workflow fit, autonomy guardrails, and proven business value.

Your challenge

Agentic AI evaluation is difficult because PSOs must classify the right workflow, set acceptable autonomy limits, and justify business fit in parallel.

  • Firms lack clear criteria to distinguish when judgment-heavy workflows are a fit for autonomous reasoning rather than Gen AI or rules-based automation.
  • Evaluations remain tool-first instead of pressure testing agents to see if they can operate across realistic PSO workflows that span disparate silos like document management systems, CRM, and billing functions.
  • The level of acceptable autonomy varies widely across tasks, professions, and client context, making a standard approval approach difficult to implement.
  • Defining authority and accountability for outcomes of agents that work across systems and silos.
  • Commercial fit of use cases is difficult to confirm, as use of agents has implications on service mix, pricing logic, and client expectations in parallel.

Less than 10% of professionals would be comfortable allowing AI to make final decisions on complex matters. This reality will bound the acceptable level of autonomy for agentic use cases under consideration.

40% of professionals have been told to both use and not use AI on client work. This level of conflict heightens the risk of agentic AI being used in contravention of client instructions.

Common obstacles

These barriers hinder the ability of firms to assess and approve agentic AI use cases on a consistent basis.

  • Teams continue to conflate agentic AI with Gen AI, leading to vague proposals that fail to define specific professional workflow boundaries.
  • A lack of firm-wide standards regarding autonomy thresholds based on work product type creates inconsistent, practice-area-specific risk tolerances.
  • Use cases are often supported using proxy ROI data focused on internal efficiency metrics rather than decision-grade evidence that supports business impact. This is further compounded by the fact that the blank-check funding era is ending.
  • It's difficult to manage agentic use cases that are operationally successful but commercially disruptive.
  • Siloed, function-based agent creation (i.e. for marketing or legal) leads to AI agent sprawl.
  • Data and AI literacy gaps hinder agent effectiveness and scalability.

82% of professionals say their organizations do not measure AI ROI or are unsure if they do. Your agentic AI selection criterion must force alignment to a specific, measurable commercial outcome.

Source: Reuters, 2026

Expect agentic AI to move quickly from exploration to workflow integration

The adoption curve is steepening.

Agentic AI is defined as an AI-enabled system that can plan, decide, and act across multistep workflows using tools and feedback to progress work toward a defined goal.

15 53 77

% of organizations using agentic AI

% of organizations planning or considering agentic AI

% of professionals who expect agentic AI to be central to their workflows by 2030

Build a triage model for PSO agentic AI use cases

Core Problem

PSOs need a structured way to determine which workflows are safe, suitable for agentic AI, and worth prioritizing.

Challenges

Outcomes

  • The level of acceptable autonomy varies based on the situation.
  • Valid use cases can have an outsized impact on entrenched PSO operating models.
  • Gain clarity on AI maturity across technology, people, data, and governance dimensions.
  • Prioritize agentic use cases based on feasibility, firm value, and readiness.

KEY INSIGHT

In PSOs, agentic AI is primarily a workflow governance decision. Firms create value when they apply explicit gates for safety, suitability, and prioritization before scaling use cases into delivery.

In PSOs, agentic AI is primarily a workflow governance decision. Firms create value when they apply explicit gates for safety, suitability, and prioritization before scaling use cases into delivery.

Info-Tech's methodology for determining where agentic AI fits in PSO firms

1. Define & Anchor the Context

2. Identify & Assess
Use Cases

3. Prioritize & Validate the Portfolio

Phase Steps

1.1 Align on fundamental agentic AI concepts
1.2 Anchor AI capability to business context

2.1 Review the Tool Structure and Scoring Model
2.2 Identify Candidate Use Cases Across Value Stream Domains

3.1 Score use cases for prioritization
3.2 Review and validate use case portfolio

Phase Outcomes

A shared understanding of agentic AI concepts, capability patterns, and how they connect to your business context

A structured set of agentic AI use cases anchored to clear capabilities evaluated against consensus-driven criterion

A prioritized and validated use case portfolio with alignment on the highest-value opportunities to pursue

Insight summary

Agentic AI in PSOs requires workflow discipline

The strongest use cases are grounded in real service workflows, bounded by review, and prioritized for business fit, delivery value, and firm readiness. However, it's also important to consider optimizing your current workflow designs for AI agent capabilities.

Map to real workflows

Use cases should be anchored in named value streams and business capabilities. This approach exposes where the workflow sits, who owns it, which systems and handoffs it touches, and how its value will be measured across delivery, growth, and operations.

Use agents to absorb coordination workload

Early agentic wins come from workflows that are cross-step, repetitive, and coordination-heavy, such as routing, retrieval, follow-up, exception handling, and documentation assembly. These use cases increase delivery leverage around professionals without automating judgment.

Gate autonomy by exposure

Client-facing outputs, regulatory exposure, reviewability, and workflow coupling should determine how much autonomy is allowed. In PSOs, acceptable autonomy varies by task, profession, and client context.

Measure value beyond productivity

Measure impact on delivery leverage, quality, trust, margin, and client outcomes, not just internal productivity signals.

Pressure test commercial fit

Confirm use case implications early for pricing, service mix, client expectations, and the broader firm business model before expanding scope.

Research deliverable

Each step of this research is accompanied by supporting deliverables to help you accomplish your goals:

Agentic AI Use Case Tool for Professional Services Organizations

This tool provides the structure to identify agentic AI use cases, score each one across business value and feasibility, and build a prioritized portfolio, enabling teams to confidently select the highest-impact opportunities ready to move into the Build Your Agentic AI Prototype phase.

Measure the value of this research

Leverage this research's approach to ensure your agentic AI use cases align with and support your key business drivers and accelerate time to value.

A table summarizing this research's approach to ensure your agentic AI use cases align with and support your key business drivers and accelerate time to value.

Staffing case study

Agentic AI candidate screening

INDUSTRY: Staffing & Recruiting
SOURCE: Adecco Group Website

Challenge

Adecco faced mounting pressure to manage a high-volume, time-sensitive recruiting workflow as candidate expectations increasingly demanded faster, more responsive engagement. At the same time, the organization needed to protect service quality and candidate experience, a challenge that required freeing recruiters from administrative burden without removing human judgment.

Solution

Adecco deployed an AI prescreening workflow that interviews candidates by SMS or email, records responses in Salesforce, summarizes the interactions, and routes completed cases back to recruiters. Recruiters review transcripts and decide who advances in the hiring process.

Results

Using this new workflow, Adecco helped 28 companies fill vacancies, contacted thousands of candidates, and achieved a 4.6/5 candidate satisfaction rating. It also reported that 57% of candidate conversations occurred outside standard working hours. In later scale disclosures, Adecco said the workflow delivered 15% time savings, significantly reduced time to fill, increased fill rates, and lowered cost to serve.

Law firm case study

INDUSTRY: Legal
SOURCE: A&O Shearman Website

Challenge

Major law firm A&O Shearman faced multihour, deadline-sensitive workflows in areas such as antitrust filings, fund formation, cybersecurity, and loan reviews. All of these high-value areas required deep legal expertise and multistep processes. These workflows were taking 5-10+ hours of senior lawyer time per matter.

Solution

Working in partnership with Harvey AI, A&O built a series of agents, embedding the firm's own lawyer's expertise. Each of the agents were configured for a specific, high-complexity practice domain. For all agent outputs, human review was part of the workflow. Additionally, A&O uses these tools internally and also sells them commercially to clients and peer firms, sharing software revenue with Harvey AI.

Results

A&O's Harvey-based agents are already reducing the time spent on deadline-sensitive legal workflows from hours to minutes. The initial rollout covers high-value work in antitrust, cybersecurity, fund formation, and loan review, and the firm has gone beyond internal use by selling these solutions to their clients and other law firms.

Workshop overview

Day 1

Day 2

Day 3

Day 4

Day 5

Activities

Define

Anchor

Generate

Score

Validate

1.1 Align on fundamental agentic AI concepts.

  • Build shared AI understanding.
  • Distinguish automation from autonomy.
  • Review agent roles, autonomy levels, and common workflow patterns.
  • Review sample PSO examples.

1.2 Anchor on business capabilities.

  • Review the PSO business reference architecture.
  • Map value streams, capabilities, and candidate workflow areas.
  • Identify where agentic AI may be relevant in the business context.

2.1 Confirm the use case scoring model.

  • Review the Agentic AI Use Case Tool for Professional Services Organizations.
  • Confirm business value and feasibility criteria.
  • 2.2 Generate candidate use cases tied to capabilities and value sources.

3.1 Score use cases.

  • Score use cases across business impact and implementation feasibility.
  • Confirm value source, agent role, and autonomy level.
  • Plot use cases in the prioritization matrix.

3.2 Review portfolio.

  • Review the portfolio distribution and top candidates.
  • Confirm pilot readiness, owners, and prerequisites.
  • Finalize the tiered use case portfolio and next steps.

Deliverables

  • Shared understanding of agentic AI and workflow fit
  • Candidate workflow areas tied to business capabilities and value streams
  • Structured shortlist of candidate use cases and agreed scoring model
  • Scored use cases and draft portfolio matrix
  • Validated portfolio with pilot, watch, and defer decisions

Phase 1

Define & Anchor the Context

Phase 1

Phase 2

Phase 3

1.1 Align on fundamental agentic AI concepts

1.2 Anchor AI capability to business context

2.1 Review the tool structure and scoring model

2.2 Identify candidate use cases across value stream domains

3.1 Score use cases for prioritization

3.2 Review and validate use case portfolio

This phase will walk you through the following activities:

  • Review your organization's business goals, key initiatives, and capability maps to anchor AI planning in real, firm-level priorities.
  • Explore the purpose and structure of AI use cases to build a common understanding of how they support core processes and systems.

This phase involves the following participants:

  • AI initiative lead
  • CIO
  • Other IT/practice leadership
  • Senior business leader and managers accountable for AI initiatives

1.1 Align on fundamental agentic AI concepts

1-2 hours

  1. Gather the AI strategy creation team and introduce the concept of agentic AI, systems that are goal driven, tool using, and adaptive, distinguishing them from simple automation and AI assistance.
  2. Walk through the four agentic AI capability patterns that repeatedly deliver value across industries.
  3. Discuss how real-world agents combine multiple patterns in their workflow and establish a shared vocabulary your team will use going forward.

Input

Output

  • Business goals
  • Business initiatives
  • Business capability map
  • AI use cases
  • Shared agentic AI vocabulary
  • Clarity on the difference between automation, AI assistance, and agentic systems
  • Four AI types defined and distinguished from agentic AI
  • Understanding of the four agentic AI capability patterns

Materials

Participants

  • Collaboration/brainstorming tool (whiteboard, flip chart, digital equivalent)
  • Four agentic AI capability patterns
  • Agentic AI taxonomy view
  • AI initiative lead
  • CIO
  • Other IT leadership
  • Senior business leaders and managers accountable for AI initiatives

Position agentic AI on the automation spectrum

From rules to agents

Concept

Profile

Description

Typical Autonomy Range

Coordination Pattern

Typical Use/ Example

Traditional Automation

Rule-Based Operator

Executes predefined, rule-based tasks with no learning or reasoning.

None

None

RPA, workflow triggers, autoapprovals

AI Agent

Specialist

A single intelligent unit that can perceive, reason, and act to produce a response. May use memory and tools but operates within defined boundaries.

Assistive to guided

Minimal (single agent)

AI assistant, chatbots, recommendation agent

Multi-Agent System (MAS)

Team of Specialists

An MAS is a network of cooperating AI agents that each do their part when told to (e.g. one checks weather, one looks at prices, one manages reservations).

Guided to conditional

Coordinated (multi-agent)

Supply chain agents, logistics optimization, multibot workflows

Agentic AI

Self-Managing Assistant

A self-directed, evolving autonomous system that can reason, plan, and act using multiple AI agents. It manages its own feedback loops and tool usage and is internally orchestrated.

Conditional to autonomous

Dynamic self-managed

Adaptive workflows, continuous optimization, self-improving enterprise AI

Agentic systems exist on a progression of autonomy

How much authority should your agent have?

1

Assistive

(Human Initiated)

2

Guided

(Bounded Automation)

3

Conditional

(Acts Within Thresholds)

4

Autonomous

(Acts Without Real-Time Review)

The human starts the task, the agent analyzes or drafts, and the human decides and acts. Best for early use cases and low trust environments.

The agent performs defined steps within fixed rules, workflow boundaries, or approvals. The human still governs important handoffs.

The agent can act automatically when conditions are normal and preapproved thresholds are met, but it must escalate exceptions.

The agent plans and executes without waiting for human review in the live loop, though it still operates with guardrails, monitoring, and auditability.

Ensure agentic AI use cases meet the safety benchmark before prioritizing value

Before evaluating business impact or feasibility, organizations must first determine whether a use case is structurally appropriate for agentic AI within a professional services context. This step ensures that operational realities, safety constraints, and system dependencies are accounted for before any further evaluation occurs.

Professional Accountability Boundary

Regulatory and Compliance Exposure

External Reliance and Representation Risk

Workflow Coupling and Cascade Risk

Human Reviewabilty

Reversibility and Containment

Does this influence professional advice, judgment, or conclusions?

Can a qualified professional confidently sign off on the output?

Is the workflow subject to audit requirements, regulatory filings, or professional standards?

Will a client, regulator, or third party act on this output or assume it reflects professional judgment?

Does the output represent your firm's position on a particular matter or influence external decisions?

Does the output feed into other deliverables or regulatory filings?

Can errors spread across engagements, financial outputs, or compliance artifacts?

Is the review process practical and reliable under time pressure?

Is there enough visible evidence, traceability, and rationale for a reviewer to meaningfully challenge or validate the output?

Can decisions be easily reversed or corrected without downstream impact?

Is there a clear mechanism to contain failures before they spread?

High accountability exposure requires constrained autonomy or a rejection of the use case.

High regulatory exposure limits full autonomy and requires auditability.

High levels of reliance require explicit review controls and should constrain autonomy.

High interdependency increases need for coordination controls and supervision. Alternatively, the scope can be constrained or decomposed.

Low reviewability leads to a defer or reject flag on the use case.

Low reversibility requires restricted autonomy or a rejection of the use case.

Not every workflow requires agentic AI

While agents offer powerful automation opportunities, they are not a universal solution.

After confirming the use case is structurally appropriate, assess whether introducing autonomy into a judgment-driven workflow is warranted or whether a workflow redesign, Gen AI, or traditional automation is the better approach.

Multistep Coordination

Does the workflow require orchestration across roles, systems, or client interactions?

Statefulness

Does the workflow require persistent context across interactions, files, or client history (vs. a single task or prompt)?

Dynamic Decisions

Does the workflow involve professional judgment, ambiguity, or context-driven decisions (vs. fixed rules)?

Actionability

Does the workflow require the system to take actions across tools or processes (vs. just generate outputs)?

Repeatable Triggers

Is the workflow economically meaningful and frequent/structured enough to initiate reliably?

Assess and Prioritize Agentic AI Use Cases in Professional Services Organizations preview picture

About Info-Tech

Info-Tech Research Group is the world’s fastest-growing information technology research and advisory company, proudly serving over 30,000 IT professionals.

We produce unbiased and highly relevant research to help CIOs and IT leaders make strategic, timely, and well-informed decisions. We partner closely with IT teams to provide everything they need, from actionable tools to analyst guidance, ensuring they deliver measurable results for their organizations.

What Is a Blueprint?

A blueprint is designed to be a roadmap, containing a methodology and the tools and templates you need to solve your IT problems.

Each blueprint can be accompanied by a Guided Implementation that provides you access to our world-class analysts to help you get through the project.

Need Extra Help?
Speak With An Analyst

Get the help you need in this 3-phase advisory process. You'll receive multiple touchpoints with our researchers, all included in your membership.

Guided Implementation 1: Define & Anchor the Context
  • Call 1: Review the firm capability map/value streams.
  • Call 2: Identify domains and workflows where agentic AI may create value.

Guided Implementation 2: Identify & Assess Use Cases
  • Call 1: Review and finalize tool criterion and scoring model.
  • Call 2: Ideate a list of use cases aligned to agentic AI patterns.
  • Call 3: Evaluate use cases against safety criteria.
  • Call 4: Evaluate remaining criteria against agentic fit criteria.

Guided Implementation 3: Prioritize & Validate the Portfolio
  • Call 1: Complete tool with remaining use cases and refine scoring.
  • Call 2: Summarize results and plan next steps.

Author

Kassim Dossa

Contributors

  • Kevin Yengling, Director – IT & Security, Rehmann
  • Alan Segal, Chief Digital & Technology Officer, AMS
  • Andrea Voth, Associate Director, Business Application Solutions, Rehmann
  • Austin Greca, Manager – Data, Automation & Intelligence, Rehmann
  • Kyle Ireland, Head of AI Transformation, Axiom Law
Over 100 analysts waiting to take your call right now: +1 (703) 340 1171