Redraw the Org Chart: An AI-Augmented Structure Proposal for Squarespace

Marketing Academy · Field Work●AI in Marketing

All projects·From: Building an AI-Augmented Marketing Team

CoreBuild the Asset· 55 minutes

Squarespace

Objective: Apply the lesson's 3-step restructuring framework end to end: assign a named owner to the AI-owned workflow, then build a reinvestment plan showing where the freed hours go, and package both into a one-page proposal with 2-3 of the lesson's named 2026 titles.

You're the marketing ops lead at Squarespace's SMB marketing team. Leadership approved building an AI-augmented structure for next fiscal year and wants a one-page proposal, not a slide deck.

Move execution work to an AI workflow with a named owner, then reinvest the freed hours into judgment work, not more campaign volume.

Before you start

What you'll need

Free path (everything below is enough to finish)

Google Sheets

FreeBuild the ownership matrix and the reinvestment plan

Both tables are simple enough that a spreadsheet is faster than any dedicated org-design tool

Paid upgrades (optional, faster/deeper)

Notion's free tier covers this for a single team; the paid tier matters once multiple teams need shared permissions on the same page.

Notion(optional)

FreemiumTurn the finished matrix into a living team wiki page leadership can reference year-round

A spreadsheet works for drafting; a wiki page is easier for a growing team to keep current

The process

2 steps

Step 01 of 02

Moving execution work to an AI workflow with a named owner

The lesson's framework step 2: someone, usually an AI Marketing Operations Lead, owns the prompt chain and the quality gate. Execution work without a named owner drifts into inconsistent quality fast.

The team's AI-owned bucket (from a prior task audit) includes drafting, competitor scans, and reporting. Who owns the workflow, and what's their actual job?

Google Sheets— Build a simple RACI-style table: workflow, owner, review cadence.

Procedure

List each AI-owned workflow as its own row (drafting, data pulls, reporting)
Assign one of the lesson's four named 2026 titles to each row as owner
Add a review cadence column, e.g. 'weekly QA pass before send'
Note which title is new to the org chart versus an existing role absorbing new scope

Sample output

WORKFLOW OWNERSHIP
  Drafting (headline/copy variants) -> Prompt and Workflow Designer, daily QA pass
  Competitor and data pulls -> AI Marketing Operations Lead, weekly review
  Pre-send accuracy/brand-voice check -> AI Content Quality Editor, every asset before it ships

Healthy

Every AI-owned workflow has exactly one named owner and a review cadence.

Unhealthy

Workflows are described as 'AI does it' with no human review step named anywhere.

What this means

An unowned AI workflow is how quality drifts silently; the owner is what makes the automation safe to scale.

So what do I do about it?

Symptom	Action	Effort
A workflow has no named owner in the proposal	Assign it to the AI Marketing Operations Lead by default until a more specific title fits	5 min

YouYou can do this yourself, no engineering access required.

Step 02 of 02

Reinvesting freed hours into judgment work, not more output

Framework step 3: the tempting mistake is using freed-up hours to ship more campaigns. The better move is reinvesting them into strategy, customer conversations, and quality review the team never had time for.

The task audit freed roughly 19 hours a week across the team. Where should those hours go instead of a bigger campaign calendar?

Google Sheets— Add a 'reinvestment' column mapping freed hours to a specific judgment activity, not a vague label.

Procedure

List the freed hours by role (e.g. content team: 8 hrs, ops: 6 hrs, growth: 5 hrs)
Map each block to a named judgment activity: merchant interviews, brand-risk review, positioning work
Reject any line that just says 'more content output', that's the trap the lesson warns against
Summarize the reinvestment plan in 3-4 sentences for the proposal's closing section

Sample output

REINVESTMENT PLAN
  Content team, 8 hrs/week -> 2 merchant-voice interviews/month feeding positioning work
  Ops, 6 hrs/week -> Weekly brand-risk review of AI-drafted assets before launch
  Growth, 5 hrs/week -> Quarterly messaging audit against churn-risk segments

Healthy

Every freed-hour block maps to a specific judgment activity with a cadence attached.

Unhealthy

Freed hours are reinvested into 'ship 3 more campaigns a month,' which the lesson calls the tempting mistake.

What this means

Reinvestment is the step most restructures skip, and it's the one that keeps the team from getting shallower.

So what do I do about it?

Symptom	Action	Effort
Freed hours default to 'more campaign volume' in the draft plan	Redirect at least half the freed hours to a named judgment activity before finalizing	30 min

YouYou can do this yourself, no engineering access required.

Final deliverable

A one-page org-chart proposal: an ownership matrix naming who owns each AI workflow (using the lesson's 2026 titles), plus a reinvestment plan mapping freed hours to specific judgment work.

See a reference example

Sample output

Zomato, restructuring proposal excerpt

OWNERSHIP
  AI-drafted push copy -> Prompt and Workflow Designer, daily QA pass

REINVESTMENT
  Content team, 7 hrs/week -> Monthly review of AI-drafted copy against 3 real customer complaint threads, to catch tone-deaf phrasing before it ships.

Success criteria

You're done when you can:

Every AI-owned workflow has one named owner and a stated review cadence
The reinvestment plan maps freed hours to a specific judgment activity, not a general 'do more' statement