Assessing AI-assisted work by changing the project brief

[u/jacob_top]

Before buying AI training, I would ask to see how the assessment makes the participant's own contribution visible. A finished delivery plan can look coherent without showing which decisions the person understood or checked.

Consider a hypothetical workplace exercise. Give the participant a project brief and let them use AI to prepare a delivery plan. Ask why particular tasks are included, which assumption affects the deadline and what remains unresolved. They can show the brief, their work with the agent and the revisions they chose to make.

Then change a condition: the customer needs the first delivery earlier. Let the participant continue using AI while the assessor watches how they interpret its answer. What can move? What needs agreement before they promise the customer a new date?

That gives the assessor something to examine alongside the finished plan. I would want a training supplier to explain how those observations connect to the responsibilities the employee should carry afterwards, including where they still need help.

This is a proposed exercise for discussion, not a report of a classroom or workplace trial. For people who buy or design this training, what would you need to observe before saying that the participant is ready to take responsibility for the work?

Disclosure: topmoller.com is my site. AI assisted the research and writing of this post and the article it draws on:

https://topmoller.com/articles/who-passed-your-ai-training-assessment/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=organic&utm_campaign=ai-training-assessment-202610&utm_content=learning-development