Home / Advisory / The Drift Index
The Drift IndexNo validated instrument measures whether an organisation is losing the capability to make its own decisions. The mechanism is well evidenced. The organisational measurement is not. That is why this site lists capability debt as a framework rather than a finding. The Drift Index is the attempt to close that gap. It publishes every December whether the news is good or not, and it has not published yet: the first edition is being compiled now, and everything below describes the instrument rather than any result it has produced.
Rahim Hirji advises chief executives, boards and leadership teams, in person worldwide and online. He is an independent advisor on AI and human judgement, the author of SuperSkills (Kogan Page, 2026), and has run, grown, bought and advised businesses with AI in them. He also speaks, to senior rooms rather than conferences. He founded the skills platform EtonX, later acquired by Eton College, and led Quizlet’s international growth across more than 60 countries.
Two axes, taken from the drift versus design matrix: how much an organisation notices about the decisions its systems now make, and how much it can still do about them. Awareness without agency is the Stuck. Agency without awareness is the Programmed. The Index reads where an organisation sits and, from the second edition, which way it has moved.
Underneath that sit the questions this estate has spent seven years arriving at: which decisions have quietly moved, who can stop each one, whether anybody has, and what the people around the system can still do without it.
It is a reading of judgement, not of adoption. Adoption is already measured by everybody and tells a board almost nothing it needs.

First edition December 2026. Then every December, and the date is published before the work begins rather than after it, so it can be held against me.
That is the whole discipline. An annual reading that slips becomes a report, and a report is a thing somebody once wrote. The value of an index is that it is the current number, and the only way it stays the current number is that the next one is already dated.
It will not claim to be a validated psychometric instrument. It is practitioner research: a structured reading, with a stated method, a stated sample and a stated list of what it does not establish, published alongside the reading rather than buried behind it.
It will not report a finding the sample cannot carry. Where the first edition is too small to say something, the first edition will say that instead.
It will not be sold. The reading publishes free, in full, with the method, on the same day for everyone. What is chargeable is the work that follows for one organisation, which is a different thing and is priced as advisory.
A board cut publishes alongside the main reading: the same instrument, read for the questions a board has to be able to answer about its own oversight rather than for the organisation's operations.
If the board wants its own reading rather than the national one, that is the board work, and the reading is the starting point rather than the deliverable.
The first edition publishes in December 2026, and then every December. The date is set before the work starts rather than after it.
Where an organisation sits on two axes: how much it notices about the decisions its systems now make, and how much it can still do about them. From the second edition it also reads which way that has moved.
No, and it will not claim to be. It is practitioner research with a stated method, a stated sample and a published list of what it does not establish. No validated instrument for organisational capability loss exists, which is the gap it is trying to close.
No. The reading publishes free and in full, with the method, on the same day for everyone. Advisory work that follows for one organisation is charged separately.
Yes. The first edition is compiling now. Taking part means a structured reading of your own organisation, and you see your own result whether or not it appears in the aggregate.
No. Individual organisations are not named in the aggregate reading unless they ask to be.
Yes. A board cut publishes alongside the main reading, read for the questions a board has to answer about its own oversight rather than for the organisation's operations.
It publishes and says so. An index that only reports when the news is interesting is not an index.
A reply within 24 hours, and a conversation before anything is proposed.
Enquire or email rahim@thesuperskills.com
The argument the Index is built on is at judgement, the instrument it reads with is the drift versus design matrix, and the evidence behind both, graded, is at the evidence base. The parent page for all of this is AI keynote speaker. Browse every topic, audience and region, or take the speaker pack to whoever is running the day. Every engagement delivered so far, with the dates checkable at each organiser, is at the speaking record.
I have been asking these questions in rooms for seven years, across more than 200 organisations in over 30 countries. The Index is the attempt to ask them the same way twice, on a date announced in advance, so that what I think I am seeing can be checked by somebody who was not in the room.
If this was useful and you want a small amount of it each week, that is what the letter is for. Weekly essays on AI, capability and the future of work. Read by 25,000 people, every week since 2017. Free, and one click to stop.
Opens Substack to confirm. No pitch in it, unsubscribe in one click, and nobody follows up because you read something.
Running an event, or responsible for how AI arrives in your organisation? Keynotes · Advisory for CEOs and boards · Enquire