Solo AI enablement
Training that happens with one person in the room. Yours.
Not a prompt-engineering lecture and not a vendor demo. An intake into how your week actually runs, a written roadmap built against it, and working sessions on your own live files — bought by you for yourself, or by a sponsor for every named person in a team.
- Every session, without exception
- 1:1Every session, without exceptionNo format in the catalogue puts two learners in the same session — not for individuals, not for teams, not for enterprises.
- Group formats offered — none, at any scale
- 0Group formats offered — none, at any scaleThere is no cohort, no batch and no classroom option to fall back on, so nothing quietly reverts to one-to-many under deadline.
- People to programmes, one for one
- 25 → 25People to programmes, one for oneAn organisation of twenty-five gets twenty-five intakes, twenty-five roadmaps and twenty-five delivery plans, each built and run separately.
- The person who scopes it delivers it
- 1 of 1The person who scopes it delivers itThe intake, the roadmap and every session are the same two people, from the first call through to the final review.
Two ways to buy it
One delivery model. Two kinds of buyer.
The programme is identical in shape whether you are paying for yourself or a sponsor is paying for twenty-five people. In the second case it simply runs twenty-five times, separately, with aggregate-only reporting back to the sponsor.
One professional, one written roadmap built around their own work, and six one-to-one sessions on the tasks they actually do.
A programme for exactly one person. It opens with an intake into how your week genuinely runs, produces a written map of where AI belongs in it and where it does not, then works through that map with you on your own live files. Nobody else is in the session, which is the point — no question is too basic to ask.
No employer has to be involved and no team has to be assembled. If you are a customer support professional, an accountant, a recruiter or a lawyer who wants to be materially better at this, that is a complete engagement on its own terms.
What you get
- A 60-minute intake into how your week actually runs, task by task
- A written personal AI map: which recurring tasks are worth moving, which are not, and in what order
- Six one-to-one working sessions on your own live files, never on exercise data
- A personal SOP pack — the prompts, the checks, and the rules for when not to use a model at all
- Recordings of every session, kept for you and shared with nobody else
- A closing review against the map, so you can see what changed and what to practise next
- A 30-day written follow-up channel after the final session
- Timeline
- 4–6 weeks, scheduled around your working week
- Payment
- 50% to start / 50% at the final session
- Scope caps
- 1 person; the programme is not transferable to a colleague
- 1 intake (60 min) and 6 one-to-one working sessions (60 min)
- Up to 8 of your own recurring tasks rebuilt
- 30 days of written follow-up after the final session
Twenty minutes. No advice given, no pitch.
Your six weeks, plotted
Day 0
Your intake
Sixty minutes, nobody else on the call, walking through a normal week of yours task by task.
Day 3
Your written map
Which of your recurring tasks are worth moving, which are not, and the order to take them in.
Weeks 1–2
Sessions one and two
The first two tasks off your map, rebuilt on your own live files while you drive the keyboard.
Weeks 3–4
Sessions three and four
Harder tasks, and the point at which instructions you keep replace starting from an empty box.
Weeks 5–6
Sessions five and six
Chaining steps into a repeatable procedure, and deciding which step a person must always keep.
Then 30 days
Review and follow-up
A closing review against your own map, your SOP pack, and a written channel for a further month.
Your team raised one person at a time — a separate intake, a separate roadmap and separate sessions for every individual.
An enterprise engagement that never becomes a class. The sponsor states what the organisation needs to change; then every named individual gets a private intake, a roadmap built on how that person actually works, and their own one-to-one sessions. Twelve people means twelve programmes running in parallel, and the sponsor sees progress in aggregate only.
This is the part most enterprise buyers have to hear twice: there is no session where the team sits together. The commercial arrangement is one engagement and one purchase order. The delivery is one programme per named person, and the two are not the same thing.
What the organisation gets
- A sponsor alignment call that records what the organisation expects this to change
- A private 45-minute intake with every named individual, run one at a time
- A written roadmap per person, built on how that person’s own week actually runs
- Four one-to-one sessions per person on their own live work, scheduled to that person’s calendar
- A personal SOP pack for each individual, written in the vocabulary of their own job
- Aggregate-only reporting to the sponsor: adoption and themes, never who struggled with what
- A consolidated automation-candidate register — the by-product of asking twelve people how they really work
- Timeline
- 6–11 weeks by headcount, plus 30 days of follow-up
- Payment
- One purchase order for the whole rollout · 50% to start / 50% at completion
- Scope caps
- 1 sponsor alignment call (60 min) before any individual is contacted
- Per person: 1 intake (45 min) and 4 one-to-one sessions (60 min)
- Up to 12 individual programmes in delivery at any one time; larger rollouts run in sequenced waves
- 2 aggregate progress reports to the sponsor; no individual transcripts
Bring the headcount and the outcome you need.
How a rollout runs without a single shared session
Sponsor brief
Week 1- Sponsor / organisation
- States what the organisation needs to be true in ninety days, and what it will not fund
- The individual
- Told what is happening and, plainly, that their sessions are not reported upward
- SoloZ
- Turns the sponsor's ambition into named capabilities per role, not a curriculum
Individual intake
Weeks 1–3 · 25 intakes- Sponsor / organisation
- Supplies the name list and calendar access, then stays out of the intake conversations
- The individual
- Forty-five minutes on their own work — the tasks, the tools, what they quietly avoid
- SoloZ
- Runs twenty-five separate intakes and records how each person actually works today
Twenty-five roadmaps
Week 3- Sponsor / organisation
- Sees the themes recurring across the twenty-five, and where the organisation is the blocker
- The individual
- Reads their own roadmap first, and can strike anything on it they do not want
- SoloZ
- Writes twenty-five roadmaps — different starting points, one engineering standard
One-to-one delivery
Weeks 4–10- Sponsor / organisation
- Protects the hours in the calendar and holds that line; there is no attendance table
- The individual
- Rebuilds their own live tasks, alone with the engineer, at whatever pace that takes
- SoloZ
- Delivers each person’s sessions one to one, on their real work rather than examples
Aggregate readout
Week 11 · then 30 days- Sponsor / organisation
- Receives a thematic readout — where the twenty-five now stand, what is blocked, what to fund next
- The individual
- Keeps their own SOP pack and an async channel for thirty days after their last session
- SoloZ
- Re-tests each person against their own baseline, and reports only the aggregate
What the sponsor receives — all of it aggregate
- A thematic map of where the twenty-five now stand, by capability and by function — never by name
- The tasks that recurred across the intakes, ranked by the hours the organisation loses to them each week
- Which blockers are organisational rather than individual: tooling, policy, access, approval latency
- Adoption as an aggregate figure — how many of the agreed capabilities are in daily use, and where they are not
- A written recommendation on what to automate next, drawn from the roadmaps that kept pointing at it
- A record of sessions delivered and hours used, so the spend is accounted for without scoring anyone
Why nothing per-person goes upward
No individual’s performance is ever reported to their manager or to the sponsor. That is not a courtesy, it is the mechanism: a person who believes the session is being graded will demonstrate what they already know and hide what they do not, which is exactly the material the roadmap needs. The sponsor gets themes, counts and blockers — what the organisation should fix and fund. What any one person could not do on day one stays between that person and the engineer.
One person at a time, always — because nobody changes how they work by watching somebody else be taught.
How that works →Inside one session
Sixty minutes, and none of it is a presentation.
Every one-to-one session follows the same shape. It is short, it is entirely about your own work, and you spend most of it with your hands on the keyboard rather than watching someone else use theirs.
Whatever is actually blocking you
First ten minutes
The question you would not ask in company gets asked and answered here, without commentary. In practice this is where most of the value of one-to-one delivery is realised.
The task, opened for real
Your own file, not an example
We open the actual document, ticket, spreadsheet or thread from your week. Nothing in the session is a sanitised exercise, because sanitised exercises are where transfer fails.
You drive, I correct
Hands on the keyboard
You do the work while I watch and interrupt. Watching a demonstration produces recognition; doing it once under supervision produces competence, and only one of those survives the week.
Written down so it repeats
Into your own SOP pack
The instruction that worked, the check to run before sending, and the case where a person must always stay in the loop — captured in your own words while it is fresh.
Daily incorporation
One session a week. Real work every day between.
Nobody gets good at AI by studying it for hours. People get good at it by using it — inside their own work, a little every day, until it stops being a topic and becomes a habit.
Before week 1
Your intake, then your written map
Sixty minutes on how you actually work, and a written roadmap of which of your recurring tasks move first. No session happens until the map exists.
After week 6
The sessions end. The usage does not.
What remains is not notes from a course — it is a working habit inside your own files, plus a placement on the proficiency ladder that says exactly what to build next.
Week 1
1Session — 60 min, your files
Then daily use, inside real work — where the adopting happens.
Week 2
2Session — 60 min, your files
Then daily use, inside real work — where the adopting happens.
Week 3
3Session — 60 min, your files
Then daily use, inside real work — where the adopting happens.
Week 4
4Session — 60 min, your files
Then daily use, inside real work — where the adopting happens.
Week 5
5Session — 60 min, your files
Then daily use, inside real work — where the adopting happens.
Week 6
6Session — 60 min, your files
Then daily use, inside real work — where the adopting happens.
Minutes a day, against hours of course.
Set the daily habit — the minutes of AI use woven into work you were doing anyway — and compare twelve weeks of it with a one-off training day.
A training day, attended once
6hrs
of exposure, on example files, on 1 day of the quarter.
20 minutes inside real work, daily
20hrs
of practice on your own files, across 60 working days.
Where you start
Five rungs, and the one you start from
This ladder has one job: to find where a single person's sessions should begin, so the first hour is neither remedial nor over their head. It is never used to compare one person against another, never scored, and never gathered into a list of who is ahead.
Select a rung to read what it looks like from the inside. Nobody is ranked against anybody else, and where somebody sits is never reported to their manager.
Rung 3 of 5
Regular, on real work
- What this looks like
- It is part of several tasks a week, and you can tell a careful answer from a merely confident one. You still start from an empty box every time and rewrite the same request from memory.
- What your sessions would work on
- Sessions move to instructions you keep and reuse, and to giving it your actual documents rather than describing them from memory. Fewer attempts, and far less rewriting.
Read every rung as a table
| Rung | What it looks like | What the sessions work on |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Curious, barely started | You have opened an AI tool a handful of times, asked it something, and closed the tab. The work still happens the way it always has, and that is an honest place to begin. | Your first sessions take one task you already do every week and do it together, with you at the keyboard. No theory, no vocabulary to memorise, one piece of real work finished. |
| 2. Occasional and ad hoc | You reach for it for the odd email or summary, usually when something is already late. The results are uneven, and you would not yet trust it with anything that leaves your desk. | We take the two or three tasks you already use it for and make them repeatable — the same instructions, in the same order, producing the same shape of answer each time. |
| 3. Regular, on real work | It is part of several tasks a week, and you can tell a careful answer from a merely confident one. You still start from an empty box every time and rewrite the same request from memory. | Sessions move to instructions you keep and reuse, and to giving it your actual documents rather than describing them from memory. Fewer attempts, and far less rewriting. |
| 4. Systematic and reliable | You hold your own prompts, work from your real files, and chain two or three steps into a sequence. Colleagues have begun asking how you did something. | Sessions turn your strongest manual sequences into a written procedure — where each handoff sits, what to check before sending, and which step a person must always keep. |
| 5. Builds their automations | You wire tools together so work happens without you starting it: a trigger, a few steps, an output somebody else picks up. You think in processes now rather than in prompts. | Sessions move to the engineering questions — what happens on the bad day, how you know the output is still right months later, and how to hand it over without owning it forever. |
How placement happens
Placement happens on your own intake call, with nobody else on it. You talk through two or three things you actually did last week, and the rung is read off that rather than from a test, a quiz or a demonstration. Nothing is timed and nothing is marked. Your rung stays yours; where an employer is sponsoring the work, they are told that a path exists and when it runs, never where you started and never a word of what you said.
Those same five rungs are the vertical axis of the chart below — the ladder says where a person starts, and the chart says what climbing it depends on.
One day, then nothing. Or one step at a time, on your own work.
The vertical axis is working proficiency — what someone can actually do on a Tuesday, not what they can recall from a slide.
- Solo track
- One shared day
Read this chart as a table
| Week | Solo track | One shared day |
|---|---|---|
| Start | Curious | Curious |
| Week 1 | Occasional | Occasional |
| Week 2 | Occasional | Occasional |
| Week 3 | Regular use | Occasional |
| Week 4 | Regular use | Occasional |
| Week 6 | Systematic | Occasional |
| Week 8 | Systematic | Occasional |
| Week 10 | Systematic | Curious |
| Week 12 | Systematic | Curious |
Built per person
What the sessions contain depends entirely on whose week it is.
A credit controller and a support lead share nothing in their working week — different systems, different artefacts, different reasons the day runs late. So the programme is rebuilt from scratch for each person, in their own one-to-one sessions, around the tasks that actually sit in front of them. The role sketches below are illustrative examples of how a week gets rebuilt, not accounts of past engagements.
- Customer Support Lead
- Credit Controller
- Technical Recruiter
- Enterprise Account Executive
- Operations Manager
- Demand Generation Manager
- In-House Counsel
- HR Business Partner
- Founder & CEO
- Senior Backend Engineer
Customer Support Lead
The queue is eleven repeating question classes — refunds outside the window, VAT invoice reissues, delivery exceptions — retyped forty times a day.
Rebuilt in their own sessions
- Drafting the refund-refusal reply that stays polite and cites the actual policy clause
- Turning a forty-message escalation thread into a handover note the next agent can act on
- Writing the delivery-exception reply, then testing it against last month's real tickets
The repeat classes are answered from a tested draft, and the hard tickets get the attention that used to go on typing.
Credit Controller
Chasing 180 open invoices across three ageing buckets, rewriting the same three dunning emails, and matching part-payments to remittance advice.
Rebuilt in their own sessions
- Drafting the 60-day chase for a key account without damaging the commercial relationship
- Reading a remittance advice and matching its lines to the open invoices it actually settles
- Turning the weekly ageing export into a call list ranked by amount and payment history
The chase list is ordered before Monday morning, and the difficult letters get drafted rather than postponed.
Technical Recruiter
Screening ninety CVs against one hiring brief, rewriting the same outreach note per candidate, and reassembling scorecards after every interview round.
Rebuilt in their own sessions
- Scoring a CV against the actual brief, with the evidence for each judgement written down
- Writing the outreach note for a passive candidate from their profile, not from a template
- Turning interview notes into a debrief the hiring manager can make a decision from
Screening becomes a written, defensible judgement, and the shortlist arrives with its reasoning attached.
Enterprise Account Executive
Rewriting near-identical proposals, retyping call notes into the CRM after seven, and rebuilding the same security questionnaire for every new logo.
Rebuilt in their own sessions
- Drafting a proposal from the discovery notes and last year’s closed-won documents
- Turning a recorded discovery call into CRM fields, next steps and an open-question list
- Answering a 90-row security questionnaire from answers the company has already approved
Proposals leave in the same week the call happens, and the pipeline record reflects what was actually said.
Operations Manager
Chasing three suppliers for delivery dates, reconciling purchase orders against goods-received notes, and rebuilding the same shift roster every Friday.
Rebuilt in their own sessions
- Reading supplier email and updating the promised-date column without opening each thread
- Comparing a purchase order, invoice and goods-received note and listing only the mismatches
- Drafting the weekly exceptions report from the system exports, ready for a human to sign
Exceptions surface before the shift starts rather than in the following week’s post-mortem.
Demand Generation Manager
Rewriting one campaign into six channel variants, cutting the same monthly performance deck, and re-explaining the product story to an agency each quarter.
Rebuilt in their own sessions
- Turning one approved campaign message into channel variants that keep the claim intact
- Building the monthly performance narrative from the export, with the anomalies flagged
- Writing a creative brief precise enough that an agency does not need three rounds
Channel variants stop being written from a blank page, and the monthly review starts from a draft.
In-House Counsel
Reviewing forty inbound NDAs and vendor agreements a month, each read clause by clause against the same negotiation playbook.
Rebuilt in their own sessions
- Marking where a counterparty’s NDA departs from the playbook, clause by clause
- Drafting the fallback position on an indemnity cap, with the reasoning stated
- Extracting renewal dates, notice periods and liability caps from a signed contract set
Routine reviews come back marked up within hours, leaving the genuinely contested clauses for real legal judgement.
HR Business Partner
Writing job descriptions and offer letters, reading engagement-survey free text, and drafting the same three policy answers for line managers.
Rebuilt in their own sessions
- Drafting a job description from the hiring manager’s rough notes and the approved grade
- Turning open-text survey responses into themes a leadership team can act on
- Answering a manager’s disciplinary-procedure question from the actual handbook wording
Managers get consistent, handbook-grounded answers, and the drafting work stops arriving in the evenings.
Founder & CEO
Board packs, investor updates and three unfinished strategy documents, all competing with a calendar that belongs mostly to other people.
Rebuilt in their own sessions
- Drafting the monthly investor update from the metrics export and the team’s own notes
- Turning a recorded board discussion into decisions, owners and dates
- Pressure-testing a strategy memo against the objections a sceptical board will raise
The recurring written work leaves the evenings, and the thinking work gets back the hours it had been losing.
Senior Backend Engineer
Reviewing other people’s pull requests, writing migration scripts, and reconstructing why a service misbehaved from four days of logs.
Rebuilt in their own sessions
- Reading a large pull request and finding the three changes that actually need argument
- Writing test cases for the edge conditions nobody thought to write down
- Reconstructing an incident timeline from logs, traces and the deploy history
Review time goes to design disagreements rather than mechanical checks, and incidents get written up while fresh.
One curriculum, 6 roles
Each square is one session against one person’s real work. A fixed session can be built around one way of working, so the rest of the column is somebody else’s job.
| S1 | S2 | S3 | S4 | S5 | S6 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Support lead | Built around this role | Not this role’s work | Not this role’s work | Not this role’s work | Not this role’s work | Not this role’s work |
| Credit control | Not this role’s work | Built around this role | Not this role’s work | Not this role’s work | Not this role’s work | Not this role’s work |
| Recruiter | Not this role’s work | Not this role’s work | Built around this role | Not this role’s work | Not this role’s work | Not this role’s work |
| Account exec | Not this role’s work | Not this role’s work | Not this role’s work | Built around this role | Not this role’s work | Not this role’s work |
| Ops manager | Not this role’s work | Not this role’s work | Not this role’s work | Not this role’s work | Built around this role | Not this role’s work |
| In-house counsel | Not this role’s work | Not this role’s work | Not this role’s work | Not this role’s work | Not this role’s work | Built around this role |
6 programmes, one each
The same 6 people, each with their own sessions built from tasks they submitted. Every square is their own work, because there is nobody else in the session.
| S1 | S2 | S3 | S4 | S5 | S6 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Support lead | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work |
| Credit control | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work |
| Recruiter | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work |
| Account exec | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work |
| Ops manager | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work |
| In-house counsel | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work | Built around this person’s own work |
How it works
Five steps, and every one of them happens with one person.
The same sequence runs whether you are buying it for yourself or a sponsor is buying it for twenty-five people. In the second case it simply runs twenty-five times, separately.
Fit call
20 minutes · free
Qualification, not consulting. What you or your people do all day, what you have already tried, and whether one-to-one enablement is even the right instrument. If a build would serve you better, I say so here.
Your own intake
45–60 minutes · one person at a time
A private conversation about how your week actually runs, task by task. In a team rollout every named person gets their own, and what is said in it is never repeated to a sponsor or a manager.
A roadmap written for you
Within 3 business days
Which of your recurring tasks are worth moving, which are not worth touching, and the order to take them in. You read it before anyone else does and can strike anything on it.
One-to-one sessions
Over 4–6 weeks
Working sessions on your own live files, with you at the keyboard. Never exercise data, never a shared session, never a pace set by somebody else in the room.
Review, then thirty days
Closing review · 30-day channel
A closing review against your own map, a personal SOP pack in the vocabulary of your job, and a written channel for the questions that only appear once you are applying it alone.
Formats and practicalities
Quoted per person, because it is delivered per person.
Where the session happens and who is paying can vary. How many people are in it cannot.
An individual, remote
You buy it for yourself, from anywhere. Sessions are booked around your own working week, and no employer is involved at any point.
A team, remote
A sponsor commissions it for named people. Each of them gets their own intake, their own roadmap and their own sessions — run separately, never together.
A team, on-site
The same one-to-one delivery, run from your office a person at a time. Available within Bengaluru; elsewhere quoted with travel.
What you leave with
- You have done the task yourself, once, with someone watching — not seen it demonstrated
- A written SOP pack in the vocabulary of your own job, not a generic prompt library
- Clear personal rules about what must never be pasted into a third-party tool
- A ranked shortlist of your own tasks that should be automated rather than done faster
- Recordings of your own sessions, kept for you and shared with nobody
- A written channel for the questions that only surface in week two
What stays confidential
- Your intake is not shared with your manager, in summary or in full
- Your position on the proficiency ladder is yours and is never reported upward
- Session recordings belong to you; no one else receives a copy
- A sponsor is told coverage and themes across the engagement, never who struggled with what
Confidentiality is what makes an intake honest, and an honest intake is the only kind worth building a roadmap from.
Practicalities
- Session size
- One person. There is no larger format, and none is available on request.
- Delivery
- Remote anywhere, or on-site within Bengaluru. On-site elsewhere is quoted with travel.
- Payment
- In advance, or against a purchase order. Indian invoices carry 18% GST.
- Lead time
- Two weeks, to allow for intake and writing the roadmap before the first session.
The arithmetic
Why the shared day was never really about you.
If your alternative is putting the team in one room for a day, this is the comparison worth doing before you book it.
How much of a shared day is actually about you?
Move the slider to the size of the team you were thinking of putting in one room.
One day shared by 14
26min
of the day is about your work, at best.
A solo track
360min
of one-to-one session time, and every minute of it is about your work.
What it costs
Every engagement is quoted individually — and quickly.
There is no price list here because there is no honest one. What a workflow, an agent or a rollout costs depends on how many systems it touches, how clean the data is, how much of the process is written down, and — for adoption work — how many people are actually in it. A number quoted before knowing those is either padded to cover the unknown or discovered to be wrong halfway through.
What you get instead is a fixed price, in writing, before you commit to anything — and fast enough that it is never the reason a project stalls.
From first contact to a number
- 01
A reply within 24 hours
From the person who would actually do the work, not an automated sequence.
- 02
A 20-minute fit call
Qualification only. Which process or which people, how many hours a week, and who signs off. No advice given and no pitch.
- 03
A written proposal within 24 hours of that call
A fixed price, with the scope caps, timeline, deliverables and payment schedule already in it.
- 04
The price then does not move
Two revision rounds are included on builds. Anything outside the written caps is quoted and agreed before it happens, never billed as a surprise.
FAQ
Questions about how the sessions actually run
Because teaching several people at once serves the confident and leaves everyone else where they started. When people learn together, the least fluent one stays quiet, never asks the question they actually have, and returns to their desk unchanged — while the pace is set by whoever spoke first. One to one removes that entirely: the whole session is spent on how that specific person works, at the speed they actually learn, on their own live files, tickets and documents. Nobody is asked to demonstrate what they do not yet know in front of a manager or a colleague. It is slower to deliver, and it is the only version that changes what happens on Monday morning.
It becomes twenty programmes rather than one event. First, a scoping conversation with the sponsor establishes what the organisation needs to be true in ninety days — which functions, which tools, which policies, and what counts as proficient. Then every named individual gets their own intake: what they actually do all day, which parts of it repeat, what they have already tried, and where their confidence stops. Each roadmap is built from that person’s own intake, so the accountant and the recruiter never sit through each other’s material. Delivery is one to one throughout, and the sponsor is reported to at the level of the organisation rather than the individual.
You can buy it directly. A support professional who wants to close three times as many tickets without dropping quality, an accountant working through reconciliations, a lawyer summarising discovery, a recruiter writing outreach that does not read as machine-written — each of those is a legitimate engagement on its own terms, with no employer involved. The intake is identical to the enterprise version: your real work, your real files, a roadmap built for how you actually operate. Scope, format and timing are agreed in writing before anything begins, and the sessions are yours alone. Nothing you did not know at the start is reported to anyone, because there is nobody in the arrangement to report it to.
It runs as a sequence across the calendar rather than one date in the diary. Intakes are done first and move quickly, because they are short; sessions are then booked directly with each person around their own working week, in spaced blocks rather than one long day. A rollout across a whole department is measured in weeks, and the full schedule — who is booked when, in what order, which functions go first — is written down and agreed before the first session happens. Delivery capacity is capped deliberately, so the dates you are given survive contact with a bad week. If everyone has to be finished by a fixed date, say so at scoping: it changes the ordering, and occasionally it changes the answer.
Progress at the level of the organisation, never a transcript of anyone’s session. The sponsor receives the agreed objectives, roadmap coverage across the people named in the engagement, completion against the written schedule, the themes that recurred — the tool nobody knew existed, the policy everyone was quietly working around — and the automation candidates the intakes surfaced. What the sponsor does not receive is who asked which basic question, who needed a second session, or who was slowest to start. That boundary is stated to everyone before their intake, because confidentiality is what makes an intake honest, and honest intakes are the only ones worth building a roadmap from.
Both are ordinary, and one to one is the format that handles them. Embarrassment tends to resolve in the first session, because there is nobody to be embarrassed in front of — the questions people will not ask in company get asked in the first ten minutes and answered without commentary. Resistance is treated as information rather than an attitude problem: it is often an accurate read that the tool being pushed does not fit the work, and the intake will say so in writing. Where someone simply does not want to take part, the sponsor is told that an allocated place is unused and why the pattern matters, without a name attached. At no point is anyone asked to demonstrate what they do not know in front of a manager or a colleague.
The intakes are an unusually accurate automation diagnostic, and they feed straight into it. Sitting with people individually and watching them work surfaces the same task done a dozen different ways, the export nobody automated, and the three steps every one of them repeats by hand every morning — which is precisely the input a Workflow Automation Sprint or an AI Agent Build needs. Where something turns out to be worth building rather than teaching, it is written up as a ranked candidate with an hours-saved estimate and the assumptions stated, so you can challenge it. The two are quoted separately and neither is a condition of the other. Teaching a person to do a task faster is the wrong answer when the task should never have reached them.
Who should be better at this by next quarter?
Tell me whether it is you, one person on your team, or the whole function — and roughly what their week is spent on. If a training programme is not the right first move, I will say so; sometimes the honest answer is to automate the task instead of teaching it.
Prefer email? hello@soloz.ai