For the people responsible for whether a team actually changes how it works, for leadership groups who need judgment rather than a tool demo, for founders building on expertise they already have, and for organizers placing a session inside a program already running.
Three levels, scoped to where your people actually are. Not a module list. What changes is what your team can do on the Monday after.
Afterwards your team can tell the difference between work AI should do, work it should assist with, and work it should stay out of. They can write a request that returns something usable, check the output against what they already know, and say out loud why they trusted it or did not.
Deeper sessions for people already using AI daily and hitting the ceiling of it. Afterwards they can build a repeatable process instead of starting from a blank prompt each time, and can teach the next person on the team how it works.
Hands-on and built around your own work, not a generic case study. Your team brings real tasks into the room and leaves having done them differently, with the decisions written down so the method survives the session.
Which one you want depends on how your people are spread out and how much of their time you can hold.
Best when the group is in one place and the work is hands-on. The room does something a video call cannot: people watch each other try, and the quiet questions get asked.
Best when your team is distributed or you need several time zones in the same session. Live, not a recording, so the questions still land in real time.
Best when your people cannot all be free at once. The recorded material carries the teaching, and the live sessions are where they bring their own work and get it looked at.
Best when the person who needs this most will not get there in a group. Private sessions built around your own work, at the depth and pace a room does not allow.
Best when the group deciding the budget needs its own conversation. Shorter, aimed at what to fund, what to stop, and what is noise, without a tool walkthrough.
Best when one session was never going to be enough. Delivery spread across weeks so the practice has somewhere to land between sessions.
I do not arrive with a tool. I start by understanding how your team already works, because that is what decides whether any of it survives contact with a normal week.
Before anything is designed, I look at how the work actually moves through your team: what they do daily, where the handoffs are, what they have already been given and quietly stopped using. Seventeen years in HR leadership is where I learned that low adoption is rarely a training problem.
The session is built from what discovery found, using your own work as the material. Ethics and responsible use are taught inside the practical work rather than bolted on at the end.
The part most training skips. What your team leaves with, who owns it, and what happens when the first week is busy and the old habit is easier. Scope is agreed with you rather than assumed.
Ethics is not a slide at the end. It sits inside the practical teaching, at the moment your team is deciding whether to use AI on a particular piece of work, because that is the only moment it changes anything.
Your people learn where the confidential material stops, how to check an output against what they already know, when the answer needs a name attached to it, and how to say plainly what the machine did and what they did. The Amplification Model names the work AI should stay out of, in advance and in writing, and that category is the one most training leaves out.
You are in learning and development, operations, or HR, and you are the one answerable for whether fifty people actually change how they work. You have seen a budget spent and usage sit near zero six weeks later, and you do not want to do that again. Discovery exists for exactly this.
You do not need another tool demo. You need to know what to stop doing, what to fund, and what is noise, in language you can take into a board conversation without translating it first. You want judgment and literacy, not a feature tour.
You already have the expertise. What you want is to use AI to put more of it into the work, without handing over the parts that are yours. You are buying for yourself or for a small team, and you want it built around what you actually do.
You have a program already built and you need a workshop that fits inside it, at the length you have, for the audience in the room. You want someone who will ask what the rest of your agenda is doing before writing a session.
Thirty-seven years in business across nine industries, seventeen of them leading HR. Architecting AI systems daily since 2023, registered into the Anthropic Claude Partner Network.
From using the tools, to building with them, to architecting the systems they run on.
User → Operator → Strategist → System Builder
It depends on what you are trying to change and how much of your team's time you can hold. A single workshop and a program running across several weeks are different pieces of work. The length is set in discovery, against what you want people doing differently afterwards, rather than picked from a menu first.
Group size is agreed with you. It matters more than most buyers expect, because a hands-on workshop and a large-room session are not the same delivery and should not be priced or planned as though they are. Tell me the number you have in mind and I will tell you what it changes.
Nothing technical. No accounts to set up and no reading list. What I do ask for is access during discovery: a short conversation with the people who will be in the room, and an honest account of what has already been tried. Bring real work to the session rather than a tidy example.
Adoption support is part of the engagement rather than an upsell. What that covers is scoped with you, because a team of eight and a team of fifty need different things. What is consistent: your people leave with the decisions written down, and someone named as owning it.
Quoted per engagement, after discovery. Format, group size, and how much adoption support you want all move the number, so a figure quoted before that conversation would be a guess. This site publishes no training prices for that reason.
Human-led. Strategy, design, and editorial standard are mine. Delivery, including imagery, is supported by AI systems of my own architecture, which I direct and dictate end to end. Authorship and final judgement remain mine.
What I am seeing in the work across AI, visibility, and leadership. Written by me, sent when there is something worth saying.
Check your inbox for a confirmation email. If it isn’t there shortly, look in Promotions or Spam.
Change how this page reads. Your choices are remembered on this device and apply to every page.
Stored on your device. Nothing is sent anywhere.