Week 9Month 3~40 min lesson~2 min listen~8 min read

Working With AI Day to Day

Prompts, workflows, and personal productivity that stick

Listen to executive summary

Audio length ~2 min

Full lesson about ~40 min

Executive summary

~8 min to read the written sections · ~2 min to listen to this summary

This week turns literacy into Monday-morning habits: prompt libraries for recurring work, a short verification checklist before send, and embedding AI where work already happens.

You will prioritize quality under time pressure — facts, numbers, names, tone, confidentiality — so speed does not silently increase error rates.

Outcome: durable personal and team practices, not a one-week tool experiment.

Core concepts

The terms and comparisons you need for this week’s decisions — with examples by function.

Prompt library

Saved, refined prompts for recurring tasks (meeting prep, email, analysis, RFP compare). The team reuses what works instead of reinventing weak chats each time.

Why this works: Under time pressure, free-form chat regresses to vague instructions. Libraries encode quality standards.

Why it matters: Appoint an owner for the library; review monthly; ban confidential data in shared examples.

Example: Shared “board pack summary” prompt used in enterprise ChatGPT or Claude for work.

Start a library this week

Weak / before: Everyone prompts however they like.

Strong / after: Three pinned prompts: meeting prep, customer email, document compare — each with Goal→Context→Constraints→Format.

By function

Legal

Five-line checklist before any AI-assisted external advice summary leaves the firm.

HR

Pinned prompts for FAQs; ban policy invention in constraints.

Purchasing

AI-assisted RFP comparisons still require human commercial judgment.

Marketing

Claims and names checklist before publish.

Finance

Numbers only from ERP/system of record before commentary drafts ship.

Operations

Near-miss sharing when AI invents a process step — no blame theater.

Sales

CRM is truth for price and terms; copilots draft only.

Risk

Reward verification quality in performance conversations, not only speed.

Verification checklist

A short gate before sending AI-assisted work: facts, numbers, names, tone, confidentiality. Most day-to-day risk is skipped checks, not exotic model failures.

Why this works: Speed cultures skip optional steps. Checklists make verification normal, not heroic.

Why it matters: Reward careful quality, not only first-send speed. Leaders should model the checklist in public.

Example: Before send: numbers match source? Commitments real? Any confidential paste?

Customer apology

Weak / before: AI drafted apology with invented compensation.

Strong / after: Checklist catches invented offers; prompt bans inventing credits; policy amount comes from system of record only.

Workflow embedding

Putting AI inside tools and processes people already use (email, CRM, docs) instead of orphan chat websites nobody opens after week two.

Why this works: Adoption follows friction. If the tool is outside the workflow, literacy training will not stick.

Why it matters: Prefer copilots in the system of work; measure use on the actual task, not logins.

Example: Copilot inside CRM vs a separate website staff forget to visit.

Deep dive lesson

~12 min read

Deep dive: AI in daily work — habits that survive busy weeks

Learning objective. Leave with a personal verification checklist and three reusable prompts tied to real workflows — not a tool graveyard.

Context. Tools help only when they sit where work already happens and when verification is habit. This week is about Tuesday behavior, not strategy slides.

1. Embed, verify, reuse

Most day-to-day risk is skipped checks, not exotic model failures. Build a five-line checklist before send: facts, numbers, names, tone, confidentiality. Pin three prompts for recurring tasks. Protect confidential inputs even when rushing.

Reward careful quality, not only speed. If the culture praises the person who “sent first,” AI will amplify errors. Leaders should model verification in public: “I used the copilot for a draft; here is what I checked.”

Method: Five-line send checklist

1

Facts

Every claim has a source I trust.

2

Numbers

From system of record, not model invention.

3

Names

People, companies, products spelled and correct.

4

Tone

Fits audience and brand.

5

Confidentiality

Right tool for data class; nothing Red in consumer AI.

Worked example: AI-drafted customer apology

Situation

Service lead uses a copilot to draft an apology email after an outage. It invents a compensation amount.

How an executive thinks it through

  1. Numbers and commitments must come from policy/system of record.
  2. Checklist would have caught invented compensation.
  3. Prompt should ban inventing offers.

Decision / what to say

Update prompt constraints; require second check for any credit/commitment; share near-miss with team without blame theater.

Apply in your function

Sales

Ban inventing discounts or SLAs in prompts; verify in CRM.

Customer ops

Checklist before any AI-assisted external reply.

All

Pin three prompts for top weekly tasks this week.

Common mistakes

  • Orphan chat apps nobody opens after week two.
  • Speed praised; careful verification unrewarded.
  • No disclosure norms when AI drafted external work.

Practice (10 minutes)

  1. Write five checks before sending AI-assisted work.
  2. Create three shared prompts for top tasks.
  3. Use both on the next three outputs this week.

Check your understanding

Key takeaways

  • Reusable prompts beat one-off cleverness.
  • Verification checklists prevent silent quality decay.
  • Team norms multiply individual skill.
  • Protect deep-thinking time; don’t automate reflection away.

Practical applications

All

Build a personal library of 5 prompts for recurring work.

HR

Standardize job description drafts with inclusion review steps.

Purchasing

Use structured comparison tables for multi-vendor responses.

Legal

Create issue-list extractors for first-pass contract review.

Marketing

Checklist before publish: claims, names, numbers, confidentiality — pin three creative prompts.

Library materials for this week

Extend this week’s decisions with briefs, cases, and primary sources that matter for your next meeting.

1~6 min read

Output Verification Checklist

A pocket checklist before you send AI-assisted work into the world: facts, numbers, tone, confidentiality, and accountability.

2~11 min read

Deloitte Australia — AI errors in a A$440,000 government report (2025)

Published 6 October 2025

In October 2025 Deloitte agreed to a partial refund after a A$440,000 report for the Australian government was found to contain AI-related errors, including fabricated citations. A professional-services case on verification, disclosure, and reputation — not a chatbot gimmick.

Optional focus hour

After the core lesson (~40 min), spend about 40 minutes on one long-form source matched to this week’s level.

Optional focus hourPodcast~40 min listenFoundational (2–3 yrs)

HBR IdeaCast — leadership / AI episode (Apple Podcasts show)

Harvard Business Review

Published Ongoing series (pick a recent AI episode)

Why this week

Daily-work week: peer executive audio on ownership and culture, not tool features.

What to take away

One habit to adopt; one phrase on verification for your team.

Check your understanding

Week 9 · 3 short questions · no grades shared outside this device

1.A personal or team prompt library creates value mainly by:
2.Before sending an AI-assisted client or board email, the minimum verification set is:
3.Embedding AI in workflow beats a standalone chat tab because:

Select an answer for each question.

Hands-on

~20 min

Build three power prompts

This is the compound-interest skill of AI literacy.

  1. Choose three recurring tasks (meeting prep, email, analysis, coaching notes).
  2. Write each with Goal / Context / Constraints / Format.
  3. Add a final line: 'List assumptions and uncertainties separately.'
  4. Save them where you will actually open them next week.

Reflection

  • Which hour of your week is most full of low-judgment drafting you could accelerate?
  • What quality standard will you refuse to lower for speed?