Aurora Banking Group · Banking

Strategic Workforce Planning: Re-shaping, Not Hiring

Maturity
L3
Domain
Plan & Cost
Analytics
strategic
Workforce cost-income contribution
≈34pp
Sponsor
Group Chief Operating Officer
Confidence
Moderate

The situation

What must Aurora's workforce become — by segment, role and skill — as AI re-prices tasks and the cost-income target tightens, reconciled into a redeployment and role-redesign plan rather than a hiring or redundancy plan?

Plan & CostL3Sponsor · Sofia Almeida

The recommendation on the table

Adopt BNK-01 as the single reconciled re-shaping baseline

Gives every redeployment, control-coverage and cost-income decision one trusted view of roles, task content and AI exposure across five segments.

Decision ownerGroup Chief Operating Officer · Sofia Almeida
MaturityL3
Priorityhigh

Trade-offRequires reconciling HR position data with finance, a role/task taxonomy and a control-obligation register — a one-off integration across system owners.

The evidence

Aurora's board has committed to a cost-income ratio below 55% and a bank-wide AI programme — both, in substance, workforce commitments, since roughly half the controllable cost base is people. Yet Aurora could not produce one reconciled view of what its 96,500-person workforce actually does, how exposed each role is to AI, or whether its control functions are staffed for an AI-augmented bank. BNK-01 built that baseline across five segments and ~45 countries and reframed planning from a hiring question into a redeployment-and-redesign question: not how many to hire, but how many to move, reskill and redesign before their work is automated.

Aurora — Strategic Workforce Planning

The reconciled re-shaping baseline: where AI exposure lands, where control coverage is thin, and how agile the workforce really is.

Workforce cost-income contribution· people cost contribution to the group cost-income ratio
≈34pp+4vs target
On watch
Operations AI task-exposure· automatable/augmentable share of operations task-time
55–65%
Critical
Control-function coverage· AI-model-governance roles filled vs. required
<50%
Critical
Workforce agility index· % of workforce in skills-based deployment
≈12%+13vs target
Critical
Illustrative preview
AI task-exposure by function
LowMediumHigh
Operations
1
2
4
Analytical
2
4
2
Technology
2
3
2
Advisory
4
2
1
Control
3
3
1

Key takeawayExposure concentrates in operations — the largest population, the clearest redesign target.

Workforce cost-income contribution by function (pp)
05101520OperationsAdvisoryTechnologyControlCorporate

Key takeawayOperations drives the largest people-cost share of the ratio while carrying the highest exposure.

Interactive view is best explored on desktop.

Key findings

Operations & processing — about 21,200 people, a fifth of the bank — contributes disproportionately to the cost-income ratio and sits at 55–65% AI task-exposure. It is simultaneously the clearest redesign target and the largest redeployment challenge, and today there is no role-redesign plan in place for it.

55–65%of operations task-time AI-exposed

What we can’t claim

Aurora has committed publicly to a skills-based, agile workforce, but only ~12% of the workforce is in skills-based deployment and the mobility-velocity data to run redeployment barely exists. The bank is planning to move people out of automated roles at a pace its own data says it cannot yet achieve.

Recommendations

Adopt BNK-01 as the single reconciled re-shaping baseline

high priority

Gives every redeployment, control-coverage and cost-income decision one trusted view of roles, task content and AI exposure across five segments.

Trade-off

Requires reconciling HR position data with finance, a role/task taxonomy and a control-obligation register — a one-off integration across system owners.

Sequence redeployment and reskilling ahead of automation for high-exposure operations

high priority

Captures AI value without the conduct and morale cost of cuts, and protects control coverage as roles change.

Trade-off

Front-loads reskilling investment before automation savings land; demands disciplined planning.

Analytical framework

How we reached this

Strategic diagnostic — reconcile the workforce and its AI task-exposure to drive a redeployment, control-coverage and cost-income plan.

ConfidenceMedium-High

Methods applied

Workforce accounting & flow analysisAI task-exposure assessmentDriver analysisBenchmarking & ratio analysis

Statistical techniques

SegmentationVariance analysisTrend analysisCorrelation

Algorithms

None — no model required

Data sources

HR master & position dataRole/task taxonomyContingent/VMSFinance cost & incomeControl-obligation register

Outputs generated

Reconciled total-workforce baselineAI-exposure-by-role mapStructural-vs-variable contingent viewControl-coverage viewRedeployment-capacity plan

Why this confidence

Permanent data is reconciled and solid; AI task-exposure is a structured, rubric-based estimate with a stated band, which caps confidence below High.

The reasoning

Business context

The foundational Banking project, sponsored by the Group COO rather than HR — a deliberate signal that workforce planning here is an operating-model decision. It reconciles HR-owned position and role data with finance cost/income, a role/task taxonomy, contingent reliance and a control-obligation register, the joins a bank rarely makes.

Expected value

A reconciled workforce-and-exposure baseline is the prerequisite for everything downstream: productivity (BNK-02), AI transformation (BNK-03) and the digital twin (BNK-05) all consume it. Concretely, BNK-01 sizes redeployment-versus-redundancy savings, structural contingent, and the control-coverage gap that automation would otherwise widen.

Workforce landscape

Operations & processing (≈21,200 staff) carries both the heaviest cost-income contribution and the highest AI exposure. AI-model-governance roles are nascent (<50% staffed). Group agility (~12%) is far below the level the stated operating model assumes — the mobility to redeploy people out of automated roles is not yet evidenced in the data.

The analytics journey

Level 3, strategic. Descriptive and diagnostic by design: it reconciles the workforce, maps AI task-exposure as a structured assessment, and frames the redeployment choice — without predictive modelling. Honest about its soft inputs: AI task-exposure is a structured estimate with a stated band, and agility data is incomplete.

Under the hood

A reconciliation model nets roles, task content and AI exposure against demand and the cost-income path; a tenure-based rule separates structural from variable contingent; control coverage counts qualified, in-role staff against the obligation register. The AI-exposure layer is rubric-based and transparent (defensible to regulators), not a black-box score.

Confidence & evidence

Why you can rely on this

76%
Analysis confidenceModerate

The inconvenient truth

Aurora has committed publicly to a skills-based, agile workforce, but only ~12% of the workforce is in skills-based deployment and the mobility-velocity data to run redeployment barely exists. The bank is planning to move people out of automated roles at a pace its own data says it cannot yet achieve.

Method

Confidence is a deterministic read of KPI strength, target and benchmark coverage across this project — shown on an illustrative reference dataset, computed the same way it would be on live data.

Take this further

Where this project connects