Leaders ship one permits FAQ bot as a short-term win before marketing a citywide GenAI platform. What Kotter practice is this?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Win small and loud: one FAQ bot people actually use, then talk platform. Short-term wins buy belief for the bigger GenAI story.
Full Explanation
Kotter’s short-term wins create proof that makes broader change believable. Shipping one permits FAQ bot people can actually use before marketing a citywide GenAI platform is creating a visible short-term win prior to broad civic GenAI promotion. That sequencing works because staff and executives trust lived service improvements more than platform visions; an FAQ bot that reduces repetitive permit questions builds political capital, refines operating practices, and exposes real risks cheaply compared with a citywide launch narrative unsupported by evidence.
Marketing the citywide GenAI platform before any working short-term win fails by concept: hype without proof breeds cynicism when early defects appear. Avoiding early wins so staff never see tangible AI value fails momentum-building. Declaring victory based only on slideware with no live FAQ bot fails because slides are not wins—residents and clerks cannot use a deck.
Exam caveat: do not confuse a platform roadmap announcement with a short-term win. Municipal stems reward concrete service wins first. Operational check: define win criteria (deflection quality, accuracy sampling, clerk satisfaction), ship the FAQ bot to a limited audience, publicize measured results, then expand platform messaging.