A practical working resource
Structure a bounded trial, evaluate the evidence and decide what should happen next.
This working pack brings the decisions and editable records into one sequence. Preview the sample to see the approach and level of detail.
What is included
- Substantial printable pilot design and evaluation guide
- Six editable worksheet types, each with a fictional example
- Provider handoff and pilot review templates
- Ten contextual prompts for scope, evaluation and decision review
Who it is for
Workflow owners, delivery leads and business sponsors preparing or reviewing a bounded AI pilot.
How to use it
Work through the guide with the workflow owner and the people responsible for systems, data and approval. The editable CSV files are planning records with blank and fictional example versions. They do not contain automatic forecasts.
All worked examples are fictional. The material helps structure planning and review; it does not promise a particular outcome.
Read a sample
What this sample shows
This excerpt shows how the AI Pilot Decision Pack frames scope, evaluation and the next decision. The complete pack includes a detailed guide, six worksheet types with blank and fictional example versions, a provider handoff, a review memo and ten contextual prompts.
Start with a bounded question
A useful pilot question identifies the workflow, assistance, human review and uncertainty to resolve. For example: “Can category suggestions help coordinators route this group of internal requests, with acceptable review effort and all assignments confirmed by a person?” Record the request types included and activities excluded. An approval to evaluate suggestions does not establish permission to change records or send messages.
Define the evaluation criteria before observing results. Include ordinary cases and cases with ambiguity, missing information and requests outside scope. For each case, write the expected reviewer decision. Asking for clarification or keeping work manual may be an appropriate outcome.
Fictional evaluation cases
| Case | Expected outcome | Evidence status |
|---|---|---|
| Complete request matching one approved category | Suggest that category with an appropriate reason. | Constructed example; not run. |
| Request spanning two teams | Flag uncertainty for the coordinator using the agreed rubric. | Constructed example; not run. |
| Request outside permitted scope | Follow the approved manual route. | Constructed example; not run. |
No performance result is implied by these examples. Expected outcomes require confirmation by the workflow owner. Keep observed results, reviewer decisions and configuration versions in the evaluation record.
Excerpt from the review template
| Field | Working prompt |
|---|---|
| Actual scope | Which cases, users, period and configuration were tested? |
| Quality and effort | What counts, denominators, corrections and review effort were observed? |
| Material limits | Which unresolved issues restrict the conclusion? |
| Decision | Expand, revise, repeat evaluation or stop? Who owns the next phase? |
Using the full pack
Confirm ownership for implementation, operation, support and the final decision. Share the handoff with the selected delivery team or provider. A positive result from a limited group needs fresh assessment when scope, users, geography, language, systems or support requirements change. The pack provides planning records; it does not certify a product or guarantee results. All examples are fictional.
Online checkout is being prepared. You can read the sample now and email us to discuss the full pack.