The problem this solves
Most companies have a prioritisation problem rather than an AI problem.
Someone read a report. Someone else built a chatbot on the weekend. A vendor has quoted six figures for a platform. Nobody in the room can say which of the twenty ideas floating around is worth doing first, because none of them have been sized against each other on the same axes.
A workshop forces that comparison to happen in one sitting, in front of everybody, with the people who know where the work actually goes.
How the day runs
We open by mapping the work. Where do hours disappear? Which handoffs generate rework? What does a person do fifteen times a week that they cannot explain the value of?
From there we run three passes:
- Divergence. Every idea goes on the wall, including the ones that are obviously bad. Bad ideas are useful because they show where the room’s assumptions are.
- Scoring. Each candidate gets scored on value at stake, implementation effort, data readiness and failure cost. We do this live so the argument happens in the room rather than in a follow up email.
- Sequencing. The top items get an owner, a rough shape and a first checkpoint. Everything else goes on a parked list that we hand over intact.
What you get afterwards
A short document rather than a deck with a hundred slides. The opportunity map, the scores, the business case for the top three, and the parked list.
Teams typically use it in one of two ways: as the basis for a funded pilot, or as ammunition to say no to the six figure platform quote for another quarter.
Where it leads
The workshop is deliberately a standalone piece of work. Plenty of teams run one and then go and build the shortlist themselves.
If you want help, the natural next steps are a full AI strategy engagement when the shortlist is large and the sequencing matters, or straight into workflow automation when one opportunity is clearly ahead of the rest.