Exercises prepared for your team
A preparation session and agreed examples for one team, one existing tool, and the tasks it wants to improve.
A prepared, 2–3 hour workshop for one team using its existing AI tool. Practice real tasks, check the outputs, and leave with a guide to use afterward.
From $1,500 USDOne-time project. Software and usage billed separately.
30 minutes with the co-founders. Check fit, tools and the next scoping step.
Your team has access to an AI tool, but people are unsure where it helps or how to check the output. A practical workshop gives them time to work through familiar tasks, compare results, and learn when a person needs to take over. Setup or integration gaps are identified and scoped separately.
One team has access to an AI tool but uses it inconsistently.
People need practice on their own tasks, including checking the output.
An internal owner can help the team keep using the guide after the workshop.
From $1,500 USD
One-time project. Final scope and price agreed in writing.
Help one team use its existing AI tool on the work it actually does, with examples prepared around its tasks.
Book a free scoping call ↗30 minutes with the co-founders to check fit, tools and the next scoping step. No obligation to proceed.
All prices are in USD. Third-party software, API usage, hosting and any telephony charges are separate. Support is optional; its coverage and limits are agreed separately. New workflows need a new scope.
Expanded implementation and training projects: $3,500–$7,500 USD. Configuration, sources, and integrations below are quoted separately from the starter workshop.
We start with what you have. If a configuration change solves the problem, we won’t propose a custom build.
A few people use the assistant every day and everyone else forgot the login. We look at which roles have a task worth doing with it, set up the accounts and permissions, and train people on their own work rather than on prompt tricks.
A general assistant does not know your policies, your price list, or last quarter’s numbers. We connect the approved sources, check the answers against cases your team judges, and make the source visible beside the answer.
Someone pastes the output into the CRM, the ticket, or the spreadsheet by hand. We connect the assistant to the systems the work lives in, define what it may write, and leave the decisions that matter with a person.
Bring the tools your team uses. These are examples we can assess within an agreed scope:
Scope depends on your plan, permissions, and the product’s available interfaces. GitHub Copilot is a separate coding tool. Product names identify tools, not partnerships.
A preparation session and agreed examples for one team, one existing tool, and the tasks it wants to improve.
One live 2–3 hour session working through real tasks, useful prompts, output checks, and cases that need a colleague's judgment.
Written instructions for the practiced tasks, next steps for the team, and a named internal owner for questions.
Bring one task and your current tools. We’ll discuss the first step in a free 30-minute call.
A team has an AI tool but struggles to use it on recurring tasks.
Choose approved examples and check that participants can use the existing tool.
Practice drafting, checking sources, and spotting missing information in the workshop.
The team leaves with a task guide, an adoption plan, and an internal owner for questions.
Give the assistant approved sources, then test a current answer, a superseded one, and a restricted document.
Explore the workflow 02Practice reviewing a draft, checking its source, and escalating a ticket outside the assistant's scope.
Explore the workflow 03Walk requesters and reviewers through complete, incomplete, and returned requests before launch.
Explore the workflow
Confirm the team's tool access and choose approved examples. If permissions, sources, or integrations need work, quote that setup separately before the workshop.
Run the prepared exercises in the existing tool. Check the outputs, discuss uncertainty, and practice the handoff to a person.
Give the team its task guide and adoption plan. Agree the internal owner and any separately scoped follow-up sessions.
Training does not establish legal compliance, replace professional judgment, or include unlimited support. Access provisioning, ongoing maintenance, session format, and support coverage are scoped explicitly.
Security and data questions ↗Practical AI team workshop starts at $1,500 USD for the starter scope shown on this page. We confirm access, scope, exclusions, timing and a written price before work begins. Third-party software and usage charges are separate; ongoing support is optional.
In 30 minutes, we discuss one task, your current tools and the result you need. We check whether the starter fits and what is needed for a written proposal. If paid discovery is needed, we explain its scope and price first. You do not need a prepared brief or a paid assessment to book the call.
We agree a baseline and acceptance checks with the person who owns the work. The agreed exercises are completed and the team receives a task guide, adoption plan, and named internal owner. Where relevant, we also compare manual effort, correction work and operating costs. These checks guide the handoff; they are not a promise of revenue or savings.
We check which tasks are worth doing with it, whether the answers use the right sources, and where someone still transfers the output by hand. Your plan and the product’s interfaces determine which changes are possible. We then agree the setup and role-specific training you need. If the current setup already does the job, we will say so.
Bring your current assistant, whether that is Microsoft 365 Copilot, ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Grok, or another tool. We check the plan, admin permissions, and available interfaces before agreeing what we can support. GitHub Copilot is a separate developer coding tool, not Microsoft 365 Copilot.
Not by default. Changing assistants costs retraining and rarely fixes the underlying problem. Where a limitation is real, compare the alternative against your current setup on your own tasks rather than on a feature list.
Yes, provided its configuration, access requirements, and intended business use are understood. First establish whether the adoption problem comes from missing skills, unclear responsibilities, poor source material, or a workflow that needs to change. These require different kinds of work.
Cost depends on the roles involved, number and format of sessions, exercise preparation, and supporting documentation. Configuring a tool or repairing a workflow is separate from teaching people to use it. Agree whether follow-up sessions and continuing support are part of the scope.
Use approved examples that fit the tasks being taught, with sensitive details removed where appropriate. Explain which information users may enter, how outputs must be checked, and where uncertain cases go. Practice should reflect the access and approval rules of the intended workflow.
IT keeps control of your systems. We ask which licenses, accounts, and integrations already exist, agree the least privilege a task needs, and use their normal request process. Where IT prefers to own the build, we can scope the design and the acceptance checks instead.
Name the owner for user questions, access issues, source changes, and incidents. The operating guide should explain that route. Continuing support, refresher training, and tool maintenance are included only when their scope, availability, and responsibilities have been agreed.