How to use AI effectively at work
The Oxford AI School
https://www.theoxfordaischool.com/blog/how-to-use-ai-effectively-at-work

Use fictional information or information approved for the tool, account and purpose. Replace placeholders and check the result.

Prompt 1: find a sensible first AI task
Help me choose one small task to improve with AI. Here is a generic description of my recurring work, with no personal or confidential information: [tasks, frequency, approximate time and common problems].

Compare the tasks by clarity of inputs, ease of checking, likely consequences of an error and effort needed to try a first version. Do not invent time savings.

Recommend one task, explain which part AI could help with and identify the human review needed. Ask about any missing detail that would change your recommendation.

Check it: Choose a task you understand well. An attractive suggestion is no use if you cannot tell whether the result is right.

Prompt 2: draft a clear rule for this trial
Draft a short operating note for this AI trial using only these agreed details.
Task: [task].
Approved tool and account: [details].
Permitted information: [details].
Information excluded: [details].
Reviewer: [role].
Actions requiring human approval: [actions].

Use headings for purpose, inputs, review, stop conditions and owner. Leave missing decisions marked “to confirm”. Do not claim that this note establishes legal compliance or approves a tool. Keep it under 200 words for the responsible person to review.

Check it: Check the note with the person responsible for the trial. AI can help write down a decision; it cannot supply approval you have not been given.

Prompt 3: draft the reply and expose the gaps
Use this fictional training enquiry only. The customer wants an introductory AI workshop for eight people, ideally on 12 November, online. A 90-minute introductory workshop can be delivered online. Availability on that date, the price and the participants’ experience are unknown.

Draft a warm, direct reply in British English, under 140 words. Acknowledge the request, ask about participants’ experience and say that date availability and the quote will be checked. Do not confirm a booking, price or discount.

After the draft, list the facts used and the checks needed before sending. Treat the customer’s preferences as requests, not confirmed arrangements. Do not send anything.

Check it: The reply should leave the date and price unconfirmed. Check all three unknowns remain visible, and that “eight people” has not become eight booked places.

Prompt 4: audit the draft against the source
Source facts: eight people want an introductory online AI workshop, ideally on 12 November. A 90-minute online workshop is possible. Date availability, price and participants’ experience are unknown. The reply should ask about experience and explain that availability and a quote will be checked.

Draft: “Your workshop for eight people is confirmed for 12 November at £450. We will send the joining link shortly.”

Compare every factual claim and commitment with the source. Return a table of claim, source support, problem and suggested correction. Identify required questions or next steps omitted from the draft. Do not introduce new facts. Then provide a corrected short reply for human review.

Check it: The review must catch the unsupported date confirmation, invented £450 price, implied settled booking and missing experience question. If it misses one, the review process needs work.

Prompt 5: measure the whole task
Help me design a small comparison for this recurring task: [task].
Current method: [steps].
Proposed AI-assisted method: [steps].
Quality standard: [what a usable result must meet].

Create a simple recording table for preparation time, drafting time, checking time, corrections, total time, errors found and whether the result met the standard. Record initial setup and training time separately.

Suggest how to compare several similar examples fairly. Do not predict savings, invent results or convert minutes into financial savings without an agreed basis. Explain what would count as a reason to stop or revise the trial.

Check it: Use comparable tasks and the same quality standard. Count the awkward examples as well as the one that looked brilliant in the demonstration.

Prompt 6: document the tested workflow
Create a one-page workflow card from this tested method.
Task and purpose: [details].
Owner: [role].
Approved tool: [tool/account].
Required inputs: [inputs and source/version].
Prompt that worked: [prompt].
Accepted example: [approved example].
Known failures: [failures].
Human checks and approval: [steps].
Review date: [date].

Organise it into inputs, steps, expected output, quality checks, stop conditions and owner. Clearly separate drafting from actions such as sending, publishing or changing records. Mark missing details for confirmation. Do not add integrations or automatic actions.

Check it: Give the card to a colleague with a fresh practice example. If they need to guess what you meant, improve the instructions before calling the process reusable.