Client: Helios Facilities Group (fictional; Kit 3 universe) — 300 desk employees across Finance, HR and Operations-planning.
Audience: general employees — not trainers, not developers. People with a Monday-morning workload and no AI background.
One-line: move 300 desk workers from “AI is a chatbot I’ve heard of” to “AI is a governed habit in my week” in 60 days, without a single policy-breach incident.
Abstract adoption programs produce abstract adoption (zero). Everything below is designed around three named personas and their real Monday-morning tasks:
| Persona | Desk | Monday-morning task | Before AI | After AI (trained) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marta, 54 | Finance (AP) | Invoice-line anomaly spotting before the weekly payment run: ~240 lines, manual scan for duplicates, threshold splits, VAT mis-coding | ~3.5 hours, fatigue errors cluster after hour 2 | AI pre-screens lines into an anomaly table (RTF + decomposer patterns); Marta verifies and decides. ~1 hour, and the boring 240-line scan is now a 40-row review |
| Jeroen, 31 | HR | Job-ad drafting + CV-screening notes for the Facilities Coordinator opening (38 CVs) | Ads: 2 hours drafting + legal check round-trip. Screening: ~15 min/CV, style drifts by CV #20, bias risk rises with fatigue | Ads: draft + critique-loop in 25 min. Screening: structured notes per CV with the bias checklist baked into the prompt (few-shot pattern); ~6 min/CV, consistent style, auditable notes |
| Sanne, 42 | Ops-planning | Schedule-variance summary from last week’s shift logs for the Monday management meeting | 90 minutes copy-pasting from three log exports into a summary managers half-read | Decomposer prompt turns logs into per-site variance + cause attribution in 20 minutes; Sanne sanity-checks the numbers and writes the “so what” |
Design consequence: every example prompt, every huddle script and every success story in this program uses these tasks. If a training example doesn’t map to a Marta/Jeroen/Sanne task, it gets cut.
| Stage | What it means | Assets | Exit criteria |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 · Curious | Knows what the tools can/can’t do for their desk; has seen a live demo on their own task type | 30-min desk-specific demo session · governance basics (04) · red-flag list | Can name one task of their own that AI could help with, and one thing that must never go into a tool |
| 2 · Capable | Has applied ≥2 prompt patterns to real work with a usable result | Prompt-pattern trainer (02) · department example pack · sandbox time (2×30 min in work hours) | Produces one real work output using a pattern, self-assessed “usable with light edits” |
| 3 · Confident | AI use is a weekly habit, not an experiment; knows when not to use it | Team “first AI habit” (manager pack 03) · AI champion floor support · critique-loop discipline | Weekly active use for 3 consecutive weeks; can state the escalation path from memory |
| 4 · Governed | Follows disclosure + data-classification norms without prompting; flags near-misses | Governance basics (04) · quarterly refresh · champion network | Zero unforced norm violations in the quarter; at least one disclosed AI-assisted client-facing deliverable with a human name on it |
| Group | n | Anchor task (before → after) | Primary patterns |
|---|---|---|---|
| Finance | ~90 | Payment-run anomaly spotting: 3.5h → ~1h verify-and-decide · vendor email drafting with critique loop | RTF, Decomposer, Critic-loop |
| HR | ~60 | Job-ad drafting: 2h → 25 min · CV-screening notes: 15 → 6 min/CV with bias checklist in the prompt | Few-shot, Critic-loop, Decomposer |
| Ops-planning | ~70 | Schedule-variance summary: 90 → 20 min · recurring report skeletons | Decomposer, RTF |
| Other desks | ~80 | Join wave 2 with their own anchor task, chosen with their team lead | RTF first, then need-based |
Time figures are self-reported estimates collected in the pilot and reported as such — see objectives below.
| Objective | Target | Instrument |
|---|---|---|
| Weekly active AI-tool usage among trained staff by day 60 | ≥60% | Tool-license activity log + monthly 3-question pulse |
| Policy-breach incidents (red-data in external tools, undisclosed client-facing AI text) | Zero | Champion escalation log + quarterly audit sample |
| Task-time savings, self-reported, pilot cohort | ≥2 h/week median | Pilot retro survey (weeks 3 + 6), reported with spread, not just median |
| Pattern competence | ≥80% of trainees pass all 4 pattern checks | Trainer check scores |
| Disclosure norm adherence | 100% of sampled client-facing AI-assisted deliverables carry a human name | Quarterly audit sample (n≥20) |
Fictional disclosure: Helios Facilities Group, personas and figures are a fictionalized composite built from realistic office-work patterns. Memo drafted with AI assistance; program design, targets and final copy are human-owned.
Prefer the source? Download the raw markdown.