Source assumption
The proposal estimates that AI could save five hours per person each week. No team trial has been run.
Fractional AI advisor
I work with leaders to test the claims, find the missing evidence, and ask what would make the plan wrong. You get a clear call on what to try, what to check, and what should wait.
The seat
I give leaders an independent read on AI decisions. Each call comes with the reason and the next owner. The work can cover Microsoft 365 Copilot, comparisons with ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini, use rules, team practice, and leader prep.
I am not paid by a software company to like its software. That makes “no” available, which is a surprisingly useful feature in an AI plan.
Good fit
This fits a founder, chief executive, or operating leader with enough AI activity to need an accountable point of view, but not a full internal AI leader.
It is not ongoing tool management, system deployment, automation building, or open-ended staff augmentation. If the company needs hands on keyboards every day, it needs a different kind of partner.
Try the check
Made-up teaching example. This is not a client result or a captured tool response.
The proposal estimates that AI could save five hours per person each week. No team trial has been run.
Approve the rollout. It will save five hours per person each week.
The estimate is still an assumption. Ask for a bounded trial that measures time spent, time saved, and review work. Define what result would justify going ahead.
Bring the decision, the evidence behind it, and the cost of getting it wrong.
Review all four offers