Note
Access to this page requires authorization. You can try signing in or changing directories.
Access to this page requires authorization. You can try changing directories.
Your Center of Excellence (CoE) structure determines how work flows between a central team and the business units that build agents. The right structure depends on your adoption patterns and your organizational maturity, not your org chart. Most organizations blend more than one model rather than pick a single one.
Match the structure to your patterns and maturity
Don't copy an operating model from another organization or default to your existing org chart. Choose based on two inputs: the transformation patterns you're running, and where you sit on the adoption maturity model. Assistive patterns with light governance can push delivery outward sooner. Use tighter central control for patterns that run in systems or are customer facing until platform teams can enforce governance automatically.
Most organizations run two or three patterns at once, so you'll usually blend models: Centralized for one pattern and Federated for another. This mix is expected. The table shows a reasonable starting structure for each pattern.
| Pattern | Recommended structure |
|---|---|
| Employee AI enablement | Centralized |
| Business expert empowerment | Federated |
| Workplace and IT services | Centralized, then Hybrid |
| Core business process transformation | Federated |
| External engagement | Centralized |
| AI-first capabilities | Federated |
Three operating models
Each model divides three responsibilities differently: setting the rules, building the agents, and monitoring what runs in production.
Centralized
A single team sets the rules, delivers the agents, and monitors them. Expertise, standards, and delivery all sit in one place.
- Best for: Employee AI enablement and External engagement. It's also the right way to start Workplace and IT services.
- Benefits: Consistency, control, and strategic alignment. One team means one standard and a clear line of sight into every agent.
- Challenges: The central team becomes a bottleneck as demand grows, and business units get less room for local innovation.
Hybrid
A central team sets standards and supplies expertise, and local teams build within those guardrails. Delivery is shared. Governance stays central.
- Best for: Workplace and IT services as it matures and more teams are ready to build for themselves.
- Benefits: A balance of scale and agility. You keep common standards while letting teams move at their own pace.
- Challenges: Coordination complexity. Shared ownership needs clear interfaces and decision rights so work doesn't stall or duplicate.
Federated
Business units own agent outcomes and delivery, and the CoE provides standards and governs by exception. The center sets the guardrails and steps in only when something falls outside them. This model requires mature teams that can own governance locally.
- Best for: Business expert empowerment, Core business process transformation, and AI-first business capabilities.
- Benefits: Scale through distributed ownership. Many teams deliver in parallel without routing every decision through the center.
- Challenges: Maintaining consistency and oversight across independent teams. Without strong platform controls, standards drift.
Compare the operating models
Use this summary to weigh the trade-offs at a glance.
| Dimension | Centralized | Hybrid | Federated |
|---|---|---|---|
| Who builds | The central team | Central and local teams | Business unit teams |
| Who governs | The central team | Central standards, shared oversight | Central standards, govern by exception |
| Greatest strength | Consistency and control | Balance of scale and agility | Scale through distributed ownership |
| Main risk | Bottlenecks | Coordination complexity | Standards drift |
| Best when | Maturity is early, risk is high, or agents cross the trust boundary | Teams are starting to build for themselves | Teams are mature enough to own governance locally |
In practice, the most common arrangement at scale is a central platform with federated delivery, sometimes called "hub and spoke." The CoE owns the platform, identity, security baseline, standards, and agent registry, and business units build and run agents on top. This approach gives you consistency where it matters and speed where it counts.
How to choose your structure
No single model is correct. Weigh five signals and pick the structure that fits where you are today.
- Maturity. Lower maturity favors a centralized model because scarce expertise and standards need one home. Higher maturity supports federation. Check your position in the adoption maturity model.
- Risk. Higher-risk patterns, such as agents that execute in systems or face customers, favor central control until automated guardrails exist. Lower-risk assistive patterns can push delivery outward sooner.
- Regulation. Regulated industries and data-sensitive work favor central control and consistency, with clear audit trails.
- Team readiness. Federation only works where business teams can own the full agent lifecycle, not just build agents. Be honest about who can run, monitor, and improve what they build.
- Speed versus control. If delivery is stalling in a central queue, that's a signal to federate. If quality and consistency are slipping across teams, that's a signal to centralize.
Evolve your operating model
Your structure isn't a permanent choice. Start centralized to consolidate scarce expertise, prove what works, and set standards while your portfolio is small. As maturity grows and your platform teams can enforce governance automatically, shift toward an advisory or federated approach that pushes delivery to the business units and frees the CoE to focus on standards, enablement, and exceptions.
Tip
Most organizations start centralized and evolve. A central team is the fastest way to build expertise and set the first standards. Loosen control as maturity rises and automated guardrails let you govern by exception instead of by review.
What stays central
Some responsibilities stay with the CoE, no matter how far you federate:
- The platform, environments, and identity model
- The security baseline and data-protection controls
- Architecture standards, golden paths, and the agent registry
- The maturity diagnostic and the standards themselves
What moves outward is delivery: building, running, and improving agents within those guardrails.
Signals it's time to shift
Watch for signs that central control is now holding you back rather than helping:
- Approval delays and a growing backlog waiting on the central team.
- Knowledge bottlenecks, where central experts can't support every team.
- The CoE and product teams debating priorities instead of delivering value.
If you see these signs and your platform automatically enforces governance, move delivery to teams. Shift the CoE to an advisory role that sets guardrails rather than reviewing every agent.
Next step
After you choose your operating model, clarify who owns which decisions and responsibilities within the CoE.