Starter Services · Executive AI Workshop
Leave the room knowing which AI use case to fund first.
Your executives know the business. We bring the AI judgment, the decision method and the outside challenge that lets them choose what to fund first — together, in one working session.
Fixed in the proposal. The constraint is what makes several hours enough.
- 1working session of several hours, in one room
- 1executive team — the people who fund and own the first move
- +sponsor conversations and a pre-read beforehand
- 7tests on every idea, in three questions
- 1ranked shortlist, with the reasoning attached
- 1first use case — owner, measure and decision gate
- +a decision readout, circulated
Which room are you in?
Four ways leadership teams arrive. Pick the one that sounds like your last meeting.
The session is the same shape wherever you start. What changes is where we spend the time — and what we challenge first.
We don't agree what AI is for
Half the room means automation. The other half means a chat assistant. Both think the other is missing the point.
Everyone has a pet project
Six executives. Six "obvious" priorities. One budget.
The board has asked for a plan
There is a date, a slide expected, and no shared view of what should be on it.
We saw a demo. Now what?
A vendor showed something impressive. Nobody can say what it would change in your business.
Your room sounds different? Describe the last leadership conversation about AI. We will tell you what the session would do with it before you commit to anything.
How disagreement becomes a decision
The decisions are yours. The method, the challenge and the AI judgment are ours.
Every idea in the room is pressure-tested against the same lens — the one we use to decide what to build in every engagement. That is what makes the ranking survive the meeting, and what a good facilitator cannot bring.
Vocabulary, settled
What these systems do well, where they fail, what they cost to run and what "production" means — at the level a funding decision needs. We bring it; the room agrees it.
Where it applies here
Your value chain, with the places AI plausibly applies marked by the people who run them — and the places it does not marked just as clearly, with our reasons.
Every idea through the lens
Candidates put through the three questions by the team, with our challenge on each: which will not survive your data, your controls or your economics, and why.
The first move
The use case to start with, chosen by the people who will fund it: its owner, its success measure, and the decision gate at which the team will scale it or stop.
The people who will fund the first use case have chosen it together, on criteria they applied, with a success measure they can defend. Where the room does not get there, the readout says exactly what is still contested and by whom — which is more useful than a plan nobody believes in.
Show me the output
This is the readout. Not a description of it.
An illustrative page from the document the team walks out with: the shortlist on the lens, and the first move with its owner, measure and decision gate. Yours is written in your words, about your business.
| Use case | Value | Feasibility | Data | Risk | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Service copilot | High | High | Ready | Low | COO |
| Demand forecasting | High | Medium | Partial | Low | CFO |
| Claims automation | High | Medium | Partial | Review | COO |
| Knowledge assistant | Medium | High | Ready | Low | CIO |
| Pricing engine | High | Low | Not yet | High | — |
Service copilot
- Success measure
- Resolution time down 20% on the covered contact category
- Executive owner
- COO · sponsor CEO
- Decision gate
- 90 days: scale, revise or stop, on the measured number
- Next decision
- Approve a 90-day validation pilot — feasibility and economics under production conditions
Who leads the room
This room cannot be delegated.
You are putting the executive team in a room with someone for several hours. Who that is matters more than the agenda.
Every session is led by a senior AI and data strategist who has built what the room is deciding about, from strategy through to systems in production, is named in the proposal, and writes the readout. Model-neutral by policy, with no vendor incentives in the room.
Evidence
Where the thinking comes from, and where alignment has led.
The lens is not a workshop device. It is how the firm argues, in public, that AI programmes succeed or fail — and one example of what followed when a leadership team got aligned.
AI programs rarely fail on the technology. They fail on the unglamorous prerequisites — data readiness, governance, adoption planning and unit economics — which nobody budgets for until they block a launch.
Why AI projects fail after the pilot — and how to scaleA standing-room industry conference session, published in fullRead the argument →
Healthcare · after alignment
A regional health organization. The dashboards existed; nobody used them. Leadership agreed the problem was confidence, not tooling, and funded a programme across departments. The decision came first.
Read the story →Fit
Right-sized when the blocker is a decision, and the people who make it can be in one room.
If you recognise yourself in the first list, the workshop is the right size. If the second reads truer, we will point you at the engagement that answers your actual next question.
This is a good fit when
- The executive team does not share a view of what AI is for, and it is slowing everything downstream.
- Several proposals are competing for one budget and nobody can compare them.
- A board, investor or parent has asked for a plan and a date.
- The people who will fund the first use case can be in the room together.
- You want the decision made by your team — with someone in the room who will tell them which ideas will not work.
Start somewhere else when
- Leadership already agrees and the question is whether the data can carry it — that is the Assessment Sprint.
- The use case is known and needs proving — that is the GenAI Pilot.
- The need is skills across the workforce rather than a decision at the top — that is the literacy programme.
- The decision-makers cannot be in the same room; a session with their delegates decides nothing.
Where the decision can lead
Whatever the room decides, there is a bounded next step for it.
The workshop is a cross-practice entry point. It leads to whichever engagement the first move needs — or to nothing further, if the right answer is to wait.
AI & Data Assessment Sprint
Two weeks that score readiness against your own systems.
If the first move is a GenAI use caseGenAI Pilot
One use case, running under production conditions, measured.
If legal or risk has to be able to say yesAI Governance Quickstart
A review path, a decision record and a policy, proven once.
If the foundation cannot carry itData Platform Accelerator
A lakehouse or warehouse foundation, stood up properly.
If the whole organization has to work with AIAI & Data Literacy programme
Cohorts, certification and the NuScienta platform.
If the right answer is to waitNothing further
A valid outcome. The readout says why, and what would change it.
Before you ask
The buying questions that matter.
The six things a sponsor asks before putting the executive team in a room for several hours, answered the way we answer them in the proposal.
Is this training or facilitation?
Neither. The decisions are yours; the AI judgment, the decision method and the challenge in the room are ours. We tell the team which ideas will not survive contact with their data, their controls or their economics, and why — then help them choose among the ones that will.
Who should be in the room?
The people who will fund and be accountable for the first use case: typically the executive team and the function heads most likely to own it. We agree the list in scoping and keep it small enough to decide.
How long is it?
A working session of several hours, with a short pre-read and a few sponsor conversations before it and a readout after. The exact length is set in scoping from the size of the team and how settled the question already is.
What if the team still does not agree at the end?
Then the readout says exactly what is still contested and by whom, which is the most useful output a divided team can get. Nothing gets funded on the assumption of an agreement that was not reached.
What does it cost?
Most workshops are $10,000 to $25,000, fixed in writing before the session. Where in that range depends on the size of the team, the preparation required and whether more than one group is involved. Nothing is billed hourly.
What do you need from us beforehand?
The participant list, a few short conversations with sponsors, and whatever strategy, plans or AI activity already exists. The specifics are written into the proposal before you commit.
Start from the room
Tell us what your leadership team cannot agree on.
Not a technology. Describe the last leadership conversation about AI, who was in it, what they want, and what is already underway. We will describe the session back — who should be in the room, how long, and the fixed fee — before you commit to anything.
Want to see the gap before you book the room? Take the free AI & Data Literacy Assessment and bring us the result.
Too many AI ideas. One budget. Choose what to fund first.
Choose what to fund first