Build, Buy, Borrow…or Bot? Rethinking Workforce Strategy for the AI Age

For years, talent leaders have relied on a simple framework when faced with capability gaps: Build, Borrow, or Buy.

Build the capability internally through training and development.

Borrow it through contractors, consultants, or partnerships.

Buy it by hiring new people or acquiring companies.

But that framework just became incomplete.

Because there’s now a fourth option that’s fundamentally changing the game: Bot.

And if you’re still making workforce decisions using only the first three, you’re solving yesterday’s problems with yesterday’s tools.

The Classic Framework—And Why It’s Breaking

The Build, Borrow, Buy framework, developed by Laurence Capron and Will Mitchell, has been a cornerstone of strategic workforce planning for good reason.

It gave leaders a simple decision tree:

Need a new capability?

• Build if you need long-term strategic advantage and can afford the time
• Borrow if you need flexibility and speed without permanent commitment
• Buy if you need it immediately and want to own it outright

This worked beautifully in a world where capabilities lived entirely in human heads and hands.

But that world is disappearing fast.

Because now, for an increasing number of capabilities, there’s a fourth option that changes the entire calculus:

Bot — Deploy AI to fill the gap entirely, or augment human capability to a level that makes Build/Borrow/Buy unnecessary.

Introducing the Fourth B: Bot

Bot isn’t just “automate some tasks.”

Bot is a strategic workforce option that sits alongside Build, Borrow, and Buy.

It means:

• Deploying AI tools, agents, or systems to perform functions that would traditionally require human capability
• Augmenting existing human capability with AI so dramatically that you don’t need additional headcount
• Building AI-native workflows that make certain roles redundant or radically different

The key question is no longer just “How do we get this capability?”

It’s “Does this capability even need to be human?”

And that changes everything.

When to Build, Borrow, Buy, or Bot

Let me give you a framework for thinking about when each option makes sense.

Build (Internal Development)

Use when:

• The capability is core to your competitive advantage
• You need deep organizational knowledge embedded in the skill
• You’re building long-term strategic muscle
• The capability requires specific cultural or contextual understanding

Example: Leadership development, organizational change capability, proprietary technical expertise

AI Consideration: Even when building, ask: “Should we be building humans who use AI, or building AI that supports humans?”

Borrow (Partnerships/Contracting)

Use when:

• You need flexibility and speed
• The capability is project-based or temporary
• You want to test before committing
• You need specialized expertise you don’t need permanently

Example: M&A support, transformation consultants, seasonal capacity, niche technical skills

AI Consideration: Many traditional “borrow” scenarios (e.g., basic data analysis, document review) may now be better addressed by Bot.

Buy (Hiring/Acquisition)

Use when:

• You need the capability immediately and permanently
• The talent market has the skills readily available
• You can integrate the new capability into your culture
• The cost of hiring is lower than building or borrowing

Example: New technical roles, leadership positions, specialized functions, acqui-hires

AI Consideration: Before you buy, ask: “Are we hiring a person to do work, or hiring a person to manage AI doing work?” The job description might be very different.

Bot (AI Deployment)

Use when:

• The capability is repetitive, data-intensive, or follows clear patterns
• Speed and scale matter more than human judgment
• The capability can be standardized and codified
• Human scarcity or cost makes other options prohibitive
• You want 24/7 availability without human constraints

Example: Customer service triage, data analysis, content generation, coding assistance, document review, scheduling optimization

Critical Question: Even when you Bot, you need humans to manage, interpret, and apply the AI’s output. So Bot rarely eliminates the need for Build—it changes what you’re building.

The Real Strategic Question: Bot + What?

Here’s what I’ve learned building talent strategies in the AI age:

Bot is almost never a standalone solution.

It’s a force multiplier that changes the calculations on the other three options.

Let me show you what I mean:

Bot + Build

Instead of building a team of 10 data analysts, you build 3 data analysts who are expert at using AI analysis tools.

You’re still building capability. You’re just building different capabilities (AI orchestration, prompt engineering, output validation) and building fewer people to a higher level.

Strategic implication: Your Build investments shift from “teach people to do the work” to “teach people to manage AI doing the work.”

Bot + Borrow

Instead of borrowing 20 contractors to review 10,000 contracts, you borrow 2 contract specialists to validate AI contract analysis.

You’re still borrowing flexibility. You’re just borrowing different expertise at different scale.

Strategic implication: Your Borrow strategy shifts from “rent capacity” to “rent expertise to validate and refine AI output.”

Bot + Buy

Instead of hiring 5 customer service reps, you hire 1 customer experience designer who builds AI agent workflows and handles escalations.

You’re still buying capability. You’re just buying orchestration and judgment rather than execution.

Strategic implication: Your Buy strategy shifts from “hire doers” to “hire AI augmenters and exception handlers.

What This Means for Workforce Planning

If you’re responsible for workforce strategy, the Bot option changes your entire planning process.

Old Workforce Planning:

1. Identify capability gaps
2. Decide Build/Borrow/Buy
3. Execute hiring, training, or contracting
4. Measure headcount and costs

New Workforce Planning:

1. Identify capability gaps
2. Ask: Could AI fill this gap entirely or partially?
3. Decide Build/Borrow/Buy/Bot or combinations
4. Design human-AI collaboration models
5. Execute hiring, training, contracting, or AI deployment
6. Measure capability delivered, not just headcount

The planning horizon shrinks too.

In a Build/Borrow/Buy world, workforce plans were annual or multi-year.

In a Build/Borrow/Buy/Bot world, AI capabilities evolve so fast that 6-month planning cycles are more realistic.

What AI couldn’t do in January might be table stakes by July. So, your workforce planning strategy should include scenarios and timelines that cope. (Not sure how to do this, get in touch and I can show you ;-).

The Leadership Implications

Here’s what keeps me up at night:

Most leaders are still thinking in three Bs when they need to think in four.

They’re asking “Should we hire for this role?” when they should be asking “Should this role even exist, or should we be augmenting existing roles with AI?”

They’re building training programs to teach people skills that AI will do better within 18 months.

They’re borrowing contractors to do work that could be botted for 5% of the cost.

And they’re doing all of this because the mental model hasn’t shifted yet.

The New Leadership Capability

Leaders now need to develop what I call Bot Literacy—the ability to:

1. Recognize Bot opportunities: Spot where AI could fill capability gaps
2. Design human-AI systems: Create workflows where humans and AI complement each other’s strengths
3. Make strategic trade-offs: Understand when to Bot vs. when to keep capabilities human
4. Manage hybrid teams: Lead teams that are part human, part AI
5. Evolve continuously: Adapt strategies as AI capabilities advance

This is different from “knowing how to use AI tools.”

It’s strategic workforce planning redesigned for a world where capabilities don’t have to be human.

The Uncomfortable Questions

Let me ask you some questions I’ve been wrestling with:

If you can Bot + Build instead of just Building, are you ethically obligated to do so?

Meaning: if you can achieve the same capability with 3 AI-augmented humans instead of 10 traditional humans, do you have a duty to your shareholders, customers, or existing employees to make that choice?

If you choose to Build when you could Bot, are you building the right skills?

Are you training people for jobs that won’t exist in 3 years? Or are you training them to orchestrate AI, validate output, and handle exceptions?

If you Bot instead of Buy, what happens to the people who would have been hired?

This isn’t just a workforce planning question. It’s a societal one.

And here’s the biggest one:

How do you balance efficiency (Bot) with humanity (Build, Borrow, Buy)?

Because there are things humans do that AI shouldn’t do, even if it could.

Coaching someone through a career crisis.

Making a hiring decision that considers someone’s potential, not just their resume.

Navigating organizational politics to get something done.

Creating psychological safety in a team.

These capabilities require human presence, relationship, and judgment.

The question is: Are we thoughtful enough to protect those capabilities while we Bot everything else?

A Framework for the Future

Here’s how I think about this now:

Tier 1: Always Human (Even If AI Could Help)

• Strategic decision-making with moral dimensions
• Building trust and psychological safety
• Developing people through relationship
• Navigating complex organizational politics
• Sense-making in ambiguous, high-stakes situations

Approach: Build + Bot (humans do it, AI supports)

Tier 2: Human-AI Collaboration (Better Together)

• Data analysis and insight generation
• Content creation and editing
• Customer service and support
• Project management and coordination
• Learning and development delivery

Approach: Bot + Build/Borrow (AI does heavy lifting, humans add judgment, context, and quality)

Tier 3: Mostly AI (Human Oversight Only)

• Routine data processing
• Standard document generation
• Scheduling and logistics
• Compliance monitoring
• Repetitive analysis

Approach: Bot + minimal Build/Borrow for validation

Tier 4: Fully AI (Human Exception Handling)

• Basic customer queries
• Data entry and migration
• Simple calculations and reporting
• Routine communications
• Standard process execution

Approach: Bot + on-call human expertise for exceptions

The key is being intentional about which tier each capability sits in.

And being willing to move capabilities between tiers as AI advances or as you learn what actually requires human presence.

The Build + Bot Strategy: Developing AI-Augmented Leaders

Here’s where this gets really interesting for talent development:

The most important thing you can Build right now is leaders who know how to Bot.

Not just use AI tools.

But strategically deploy AI, design human-AI collaboration, and make good decisions about when to automate and when to keep things human.

This means:

Building New Capabilities:

• Prompt engineering and AI orchestration: Getting AI to do what you need
• Output validation: Knowing when AI is right, wrong, or hallucinating
• Human-AI workflow design: Creating processes where both excel
• Ethical AI decision-making: Knowing when AI shouldn’t be used even if it could
• Continuous adaptation: Staying current as AI capabilities evolve monthly

Unlearning Old Capabilities:

• Doing it all yourself: Accepting that AI can do parts better
• Measuring by hours worked: Shifting to outcomes delivered
• Valuing expertise as knowledge held: Recognizing that knowledge access matters more than knowledge ownership

This is the Build strategy for the AI age.

You’re not building people who compete with AI.

You’re building people who orchestrate AI to achieve things neither could do alone.

A Final Thought

I’ve spent 25+ years building talent strategies, and I’ve never seen anything change the game like AI is changing it now.

The Build, Borrow, Buy framework served us well for decades.

But it’s incomplete now.

Not because it was wrong.

But because the world it was built for—where all capabilities were human—no longer exists.

Adding Bot to the framework isn’t just about keeping up with technology.

It’s about being honest about what’s possible, what’s strategic, and what should remain human even when it doesn’t have to be.

The leaders who get this right will:

• Build smaller, more capable teams
• Borrow more strategically and efficiently
• Buy for different capabilities than they used to
• Bot thoughtfully, not reflexively

The leaders who get this wrong will:

• Overbuild for capabilities AI could provide
• Underbuild the AI orchestration skills they actually need
• Bot away capabilities they should have kept human
• Find themselves with AI doing tasks and no humans who can manage the AI

Questions for Your Organization

Before I close, let me leave you with some questions worth sitting with:

1. When was the last time you considered Bot as an equal option to Build/Borrow/Buy?
2. What capabilities are you currently Building that could be achieved better/faster/cheaper with Bot + smaller human team?
3. What capabilities are you currently Borrowing that could be Botted entirely, freeing budget for more strategic uses?
4. What capabilities are you about to Buy (hire for) that won’t exist in 3 years because AI will do them?
5. What capabilities should you absolutely NOT Bot, even if AI could do them?
6. Are you building leaders who know how to make Build/Borrow/Buy/Bot decisions, or are you building leaders who only know the old three-B framework?
7. How often are you revisiting these decisions as AI capabilities advance?

The answers to these questions will shape your workforce strategy for the next decade.

Need help with your Build Buy Borrow Bot strategy? Borrow me for a few sprints and I can transform your leadership team into the AI ready leaders and your business into a Frontier Firm. Get in touch today. Connect, and DM to continue the conversation.

---

Martin Lewis Knowles is an Executive Director of Talent Development with 25+ years building workforce strategies across global organizations. He’s currently exploring how AI is fundamentally reshaping the role of leaders in business—and what that means for the future of work.