Operations is where undocumented knowledge lives and where new tools arrive with a vendor attached. This track covers both: getting what is in people's heads into writing, and being the team that can tell a useful AI tool from a confident demonstration.
Every operations team has processes that work because one person knows them. Writing those down has been on the list for years and never happens, because the writing is tedious and the person who knows is the person with no time. Recording a twenty minute conversation and turning it into a first draft procedure changes that economics completely. The draft is wrong in places, which is normal and expected: correcting a wrong procedure takes an hour, writing one from nothing takes a week. The track drills the interview, because the quality of the output is set by the questions, not by the tool.
Operations is usually the team that gets sent the demonstration, so it is the team that needs the checklist. What exactly does the system do when it is uncertain, and can we see that happen. Where does our data go, who processes it, and is it used to improve the product. Can a person see why it produced a given output, in terms they can act on. And what happens on the day you switch it off: does the work still exist in a form we own. A vendor who answers all four plainly is a different proposition from one who answers in capabilities.
The most valuable judgement this track installs has nothing to do with AI: it is noticing that the step everyone wants to automate is a workaround for a decision nobody took. Automation makes a good process cheaper and a bad process permanent, because once it runs by itself nobody revisits the logic. We spend a milestone on distinguishing the two, and on the uncomfortable answer that is sometimes right: do not build this, fix the upstream thing.
Diagnostic, acceptable use policy, interactive tracks by function, adoption follow-up. The four steps work together, and the free 30-minute call scopes all of them.
See the four stepsAI training for operations teams
No. It is about the judgement that decides what to automate, what to document and what to refuse, and about using assistants well on the writing-heavy parts of an operations job. We teach on the stack you have, and we take no commission on any vendor.
Small and mid-sized companies are the main case we built this for, and a two-person operations team is usually the one carrying the most undocumented process. The scope adapts: fewer functions, shorter tracks, the same written deliverables.
Yes, and the ones produced this way tend to work better than purpose-written material because they describe what people actually do. They are yours; nothing in what we deliver restricts what you do with your own documentation.
We go through how your teams use AI today, what is missing to frame it, and what the first quarter would look like. You leave with enough to decide, whether you work with us or not.