M.A.I. Consulting
Sample deliverable

The playbook a department receives.

A working reference built from that department's real tasks and cleared against that organisation's own policy. It replaces the course and the slide deck, and it is what the team actually works from afterwards. Below is a realistic sample for a fundraising and partnerships team.

Fundraising & Partnerships

AI playbook

Cleared against AI Use Policy v1.2
Approved tools: three · Review: every 6 months
1DelegateWhat AI does and does not do
Hand these over
  • First draft of a donor report, from your own notes and the last one
  • Reformatting an existing proposal into a new funder's template
  • Turning a 40-page call for proposals into an eligibility checklist
  • Rewriting a concept note in plain language for a community audience
  • Ten subject-line variants for a campaign email
Never these
  • Budget arithmetic accepted without recomputing it yourself
  • Anything containing a beneficiary's name or case detail
  • The decision on whether to submit, and the sign-off that follows
2DescribeHow to ask
Pattern A: role, audience, constraint, format
You are drafting for [funder]. Audience: their programme officer. Limit: 800 words, their four headings. Use only the attached figures.
Pattern B: give the source document
Here is last year's report and this year's data. Match that structure and tone. Flag anything the data does not support.
Pattern C: make it interview you
Before drafting, ask me the five questions you need answered to write this well.
3DiscernFour checks before you use it
  • Figures. Every number traced to a source document you can point at. If you cannot find it, it is not a number
  • Facts. Every organisation, deadline and eligibility rule checked against the original call rather than the summary
  • Language. Read once for deficit-based wording about the people you serve. Rewrite it
  • Defensibility. Would you state this sentence in a donor meeting? If not, it is not sent
The usual failure
  • A plausible figure that appears in no source. It is the most common error and the most expensive one
4DiligenceLog, disclose, own
Never leaves the building
  • Personal or beneficiary data, in any tool
  • Unpublished financials or draft budgets
  • Anything at all in a tool not on the approved list
Say so when
  • The funder's terms require disclosure of AI use
  • A colleague will build on the output as if it were checked
Ownership
  • The person who sends it owns it. AI is not a co-author and carries no liability
  • Log which tool produced which deliverable. That log is your evidence file
Stuck? Escalation: your AI focal point, then the DPO for anything involving personal data. Sample. Yours is built from your team's tasks and your own approved tool list.
How yours is produced

Four steps, about two days of our time per department.

01

Task inventory

A short interview with the team lead: what this department spends its week on, and which of it is repetitive.

02

Tested on your files

Every prompt pattern on the page is tried against your real documents before it goes on the page. The ones that fail are cut.

03

Cleared against policy

The red lines and data rules come from your own AI use policy, so nothing on the page contradicts what your organisation has approved.

04

A 90-minute lab

The team works through the page on live tasks. They leave having used it once, which is what makes them use it again.

Why a playbook and not a course. Adding AI tools raises productivity up to about three, then reduces it. Staff carrying heavy AI-oversight loads report measurably more information overload. A catalogue of 900 courses is the same disease in a new bottle. The product is a working reference built from the team's own tasks, short enough to be used and specific enough to change what the team does.

Which department in your organisation needs this first?

Tell us on a 30-minute call and we will draft the task inventory for it, free, before you commit to anything.