Studio Akarii Internal · Confidential · 2026
For the person running the room

AI Without
the Hype

Internal playbook for the training lead. One rule underneath all of it: don't believe it until you've seen them do it.

Prepared by Studio Akarii
The shape, not the script Foundations → Building → Scaling You design the sessions
Page 1 of 5
1

Why this isn't optional

The gap, then the prize

Two sets of numbers. Read the bad one first.

Almost everyone has deployed AI somewhere. Almost nobody is seeing value from it. The teams that redesign the work around it see a lot.

The gap

0%

of companies report no significant value from AI, despite nearly nine in ten having deployed it somewhere by the end of 2025.

McKinsey, State of AI 2025
0.0%

is the entire share of companies that count as AI high performers, seeing more than 5% EBIT impact from it.

McKinsey, 2025
0%

have fundamentally redesigned even some workflows around generative AI. The rest mostly bolt it onto the old process.

McKinsey, 2025
<0%

are scaling AI agents in any function at all.

McKinsey, 2025
0%

in product development are not using agents at all.

McKinsey, 2025
>0%

report at least one negative consequence from AI in the past year, most commonly inaccuracy.

McKinsey, 2025
~0%

follow most of the recognised practices for adopting and scaling generative AI. This is where most programmes stall.

McKinsey, 2025

The tool is nearly everywhere. The value, almost nowhere. Most teams never change the shape of the work.

The prize

Done properly, the same tool produces this instead.

0%

labour productivity gains at the companies most exposed to AI, far outpacing other businesses.

PwC, 2026 Global AI Jobs Barometer
0x

higher growth in revenue per employee at the industries most able to use AI, versus those least able.

PwC, 2025
0%

higher productivity growth at the most AI-exposed companies than at the least exposed.

PwC, 2026
0%

productivity growth in AI-exposed industries since 2018, nearly four times the 7% rate they ran before generative AI.

PwC, 2025
0%

average wage premium for workers with AI skills, reaching as high as 118% in consumer markets.

PwC, 2026
0%

of companies using AI agents say those agents already deliver measurable value through higher productivity.

PwC, 2025
0x

faster growth in jobs requiring AI skills than the overall jobs market, roughly 69% against 9%.

PwC, 2026
0%

headcount growth at the most AI-exposed companies, versus 36% at the least. AI tends to expand strong teams, not shrink them.

PwC, 2026

The gains are real, and large. They go to the teams that learn the tools and redesign the work around them.

Page 2 of 5
2

Read this first

Don't believe it until you've seen it

This is for you, not the client.

AI is a steam engine moment. Not a faster typewriter. It changes what's possible, it doesn't just speed up what's already there.

If you don't believe that yet, sit with it before you run a session. The room will smell it on you in ten minutes.

The practical version for clients: AI is leverage. More output for less input.

Three places leverage hides: Money, Operations, Happiness. You'll lean on this on page 4, and constantly after that.

One warning, for you first. AI amplifies whatever's already there.

A chaotic firm with no clarity on who owns what gets faster chaos, not less of it. Spot that early. Flag it internally, don't surprise the client with it in week six.

Unless I've seen you do it, I don't believe you. People will tell you they're "using AI now." Usually that means a holiday itinerary, six weeks ago. Don't take their word for it. Watch them work, on real tasks, in the room.

Go deeper, why this rule matters more than any framework+

Self-reported AI usage is always optimistic. People remember the one clever win and forget the nineteen times they gave up after one try.

Every session needs something done live, on real work, not a hypothetical.

This protects you too. A firm that says "we're already doing this" and means it needs a different programme than one that's bluffing. You can't tell the difference from a sentence. You can tell from watching someone open a blank chat and try.

Page 3 of 5
3

Before you teach anything

Exploratory sessions, not assumptions

Before you build a single workflow, find out what's actually true.

What people use. What they know. Where they're already quietly drowning.

This is diagnostic work. Give it real time, not a five-minute warm-up before the "real" session starts.

What do they use

Audit the whole toolkit

Not just Claude, everything. Email, calendar, whatever spreadsheet someone built in 2019 that the team is too scared to touch. You're mapping the actual day, not the job description.

What do they know

Skip the assumption

Don't assume everyone's used ChatGPT by now. Some built real habits, some tried it once and got spooked, some never touched it. Find out which, without making anyone feel behind.

Exercises, not demos

The rule, in practice

Give people a real task from their week. Have them do it live, while you watch. Uncomfortable for about four minutes. Then the most useful four minutes of the day.

Bring me your chats

Review the real conversations

Ask people to share an actual chat with Claude, the messy kind, not a highlight reel. Look at it together. People also tidy up their habits once they know a chat might get reviewed.

Find the overwhelm

Somewhere in this audit, you'll find what's actually drowning them.

Sometimes it matches the leverage workshop on page 4 exactly. Sometimes it's an inbox with four thousand unread emails, a calendar that's back to back with no thinking time, a sales team retyping the same email from memory.

Write it all down. Some of it becomes the first win. Some of it is just useful context.

Deepen the possibility thinking

The real shift isn't tool literacy. It's the default question changing from "is this worth automating" to "could AI help with this at all," even if the first pass is slower than just doing it the old way.

The first time pays for every time after.

Go deeper, workflow examples to hand out+

People freeze in front of a blank chat because they can't picture what's worth asking for. Give them somewhere to start.

· Drafting first-pass client emails and follow-ups
· Summarising a meeting into actions and owners, not just notes
· Turning rough notes into a proper brief or proposal
· A first draft of a report before the real writing starts
· Planning the week, blocking time around what actually matters
· Tailoring repeat outreach per prospect instead of copy-pasting the same script
· A second pair of eyes on a document nobody had time to properly check

For people who are already comfortable: introduce agents. Recurring jobs handled without someone driving every prompt, think Claude Code automations, a scheduled summary, something that checks a thing daily and flags it.

Advanced ground. Don't bring it out before the basics are solid. But for the right person, it's the moment AI stops being a tool they open and becomes a colleague already working before they sit down.

Go deeper, a fair warning and a note on sales scripts+

People sandbag their first chat share. Ask twice. Go first yourself, share one of your own that wasn't perfect either.

On sales scripts specifically, don't force it into every engagement. If it surfaces naturally, a sales team clearly rewriting the same five emails by hand, it's a good early win, visible and easy to measure.

If it doesn't come up, don't manufacture it. Let the audit tell you what's real for this firm.

Page 4 of 5
4

Whatever else changes, these don't

The foundations every programme needs

Regardless of what the exploratory sessions found, every programme needs these underneath it.

Treat them as the floor, not optional extras.

Money

Where does the budget actually leak? Ask for specific numbers. Vague answers mean you push further.

Operations

What's the headache nobody's fixed because it's never quite bad enough to stop and address? Usually the best first win.

Happiness

What work genuinely drains people? Don't skip it. It turns "we got faster" into "we got our evenings back."

Master documents

The least exciting session. The most important one.

Your job isn't to write it for them. It's to extract what's already in their heads, get it into a Claude Project, and keep it alive.

A Master Document written once and never opened again isn't context, it's an artifact. Every workflow you build afterward should add to it, not sit beside it.

Skip this, or let it go stale, and every later session produces weaker output. You'll feel it without knowing why.

You'll meet three types in every engagement.

Sponsors

Light up the second you mention AI. Use them. Get them talking in front of the room.

Neutral Blockers

The majority, roughly 80% of any room. Not resistant, just unconvinced. Give them an undeniable win.

Blockers

Usually afraid, not stubborn. Have that conversation privately, never in front of the room.

A useful trick

Ask the room lightly: "who here has already tried Claude or ChatGPT for something at home?" The hands that go up are your early Sponsors.

Go deeper, the delegation framework+

The single best reframe you'll use. Not "learning to talk to a chatbot." Learning to manage a very fast, very junior, extremely well-read assistant.

Get clients answering these out loud. Don't just present them as a slide.

  1. 1What should I delegate to AI?
  2. 2What context does it need?
  3. 3What does good actually look like?
  4. 4What must a human check before this goes anywhere near a client?
  5. 5What can be saved and reused?
  6. 6What can become a repeatable workflow?
Page 5 of 5
5

Yours to design

Foundations, building, scaling

Here's the shape, not the script.

Every programme moves through three phases. You can't scale before people trust the basics. You can't stay in foundations forever, or it turns into a seminar nobody applies.

What fills each phase is yours to write, based on what page 3 actually found, not a generic template.

Use the questions below to check your plan. Not to copy it.

Phase One
Foundations
  • Has everyone done something real, live, that actually saved them time?
  • Has the firm started writing down what's currently just in people's heads?
  • Do you know your Sponsors, Neutral Blockers, and Blockers yet?
  • Have you found at least one genuinely enthusiastic person to build around?
Phase Two
Building
  • Are the workflows theirs, built around what the audit found, not a template?
  • Is someone besides you starting to champion this internally?
  • Have you resisted rolling everything out everywhere at once?
  • Did a win elsewhere travel to your biggest sceptic, instead of starting there?
Phase Three
Scaling
  • Can they keep going without you in the room, team or just the one enthusiast?
  • Is there a rhythm that doesn't depend on you showing up to remind them?
  • Could they explain this programme in their own words?
  • Are people still asking "could this be easier too," unprompted?
Go deeper, keeping it small and resisting the rollout instinct+

Rapid Action Team: three to five people, maximum, if the firm's big enough to have five people doing similar work.

In a small boutique firm, don't force a "team" into existence for the sake of it. The actual requirement, at any size, is at least one person who's genuinely enthusiastic, not politely going along with it. Find that person and lean on them. They'll do more for adoption than any committee will.

If the firm is bigger, pick the rest for curiosity and follow-through, not seniority. Sometimes your best person is three levels down, already quietly using AI to write their reports faster.

Triage: resist the instinct to roll out everywhere in month one. It never works, and it exhausts everyone, including you.

Pick one or two wins that hit Money, Operations, and Happiness at once. Land those properly. Let the rest of the firm see it before expanding.

·

Not a firm that's "used AI"

What you're actually trying to leave behind

  • Master Documents that are actually used, not filed away
  • At least one genuinely enthusiastic person, team or solo, still testing things
  • At least 3 to 5 real, working, repeatable workflows
  • A written playbook in their own voice, not a copy of this one
  • A rhythm that doesn't depend on you turning up to remind them
  • People who are still curious, still asking what else could be easier

Closing note to yourself

The deliverable isn't the workflows. It's curiosity that survives without you in the room. A firm still asking "could this part be easier too" in month nine has succeeded, even if half the original workflows have already been replaced by better ones they found themselves. You're not selling magic, you're building leverage and the habit of going looking for more of it. Run it well, keep it honest, and don't be afraid to tell a client something isn't working halfway through month two. That's worth more than another polished slide.