Executives do not need another list of AI trends before every decision. They need to know which question matters, what evidence is missing and who can act on the answer. Use this checklist to prepare that conversation without pretending that a score can describe the whole organisation.
Clarify the decision
Write the decision in one sentence. “Understand AI” is broad; “Decide whether to test an approved assistant for this workflow” gives the briefing or workshop a clear purpose. Name the sponsor and the people who can approve the next step.
If leaders disagree, separate disagreement about facts from disagreement about priorities or acceptable trade-offs. The first may need research or a briefing. The second may need a facilitated workshop with the right decision-makers.
Work through the checklist
Copy the table into your preparation notes. Mark each item clear, needs evidence or not applicable, then add an owner and next action. The labels organise work; they are not maturity levels.
| Area | Question to clarify | Useful preparation |
|---|---|---|
| Decision | What decision or task should the programme support? | One-sentence objective and decision owner |
| Business context | Which workflow or strategic question matters? | Current process, alternatives and constraints |
| Baseline | What do we know about current quality, effort or failures? | Evidence, estimates and missing measurements distinguished |
| Participants | Who needs to learn, contribute, decide and review? | Roles, starting knowledge and availability |
| Tools | Which tools and access are approved? | Account availability and internal support contact |
| Data | What may be shared, tested and retained? | Permitted inputs and sharing decisions |
| Review | Who checks outputs and handles failures? | Quality criteria and accountable reviewer |
| Expertise | What knowledge is missing from the room? | The required perspective, not only a prestigious title |
| Output | What should exist after the session? | Decision note, shortlist, learning evidence or experiment plan |
| Follow-up | Who uses the output, and when is the next review? | Owner, time allocation and review date |
| Practical scope | What dates, location, language and budget constraints apply? | Enough context for a comparable proposal |
Do not collect confidential files simply to complete the table. An initial description can identify the issue; actual sharing and retention arrangements belong in the preparation scope.
Turn gaps into preparation tasks
If the business question is unclear, the sponsor should refine it before commissioning specialist expertise. If the workflow has no owner, identify one. If employees lack access to approved tools, resolve that dependency before a practical exercise.
Some unknowns can become the work itself. A workshop can help define an evaluation or compare candidate workflows. State that intended output rather than suggesting the programme already knows which use case will succeed.
An illustrative preparation record might say: “We have several candidate tasks, but no comparable baseline. The workshop should agree which evidence to collect and who will collect it.” That is a useful scope even before choosing a pilot.
Choose the next format
These choices can form a sequence, but they do not need to become a large programme by default. Purchase the help that resolves the current question.
Record the handover
At the end of the discussion, record what was decided, what remains conditional, which ideas were deferred and who owns the next action. Set a review date. If further technical work or training is needed, give it a separate scope rather than assuming it is included in the session.
The use-case worksheet and thirty-day follow-up plan help move from preparation to a bounded investigation.
Methodology
About this checklist
Version 1, published by AISB’s editorial team on 4 October 2026. This is an original planning aid, not a validated maturity assessment, legal review or evidence of a client result. No score or certification is produced.
Start with the decision you need to clarify
Share your question and the people who need to act on the answer.
Frequently asked questions
How do we know whether we are ready for an AI workshop?
You should have a sponsor, a business question, relevant participants and a realistic output. Missing baseline data can be a task for the workshop, but missing decision authority, tool permission or follow-up ownership should be resolved explicitly.
Does this checklist produce an AI maturity score?
No. It is an editorial preparation aid. Record what is clear, what needs evidence and who will resolve each gap. It is not a scientific assessment or certification.
What should a board AI briefing focus on?
A specific decision or question, relevant context, alternative options, limits and the evidence needed next. The scope should identify the expertise required and preserve responsibility with the decision-makers.
Published by
- AI Summit BarcelonaEditorial team
Related reading
Enterprise AI Adoption: From Awareness to Useful Experiments
A decision guide for companies moving beyond AI awareness. Diagnose the barrier, choose the appropriate format and define the evidence needed before expanding an experiment.
Which AI Learning Format Fits Your Business Problem?
Start with the decision or workflow you need to improve. This comparison explains what each format can produce, when to choose another approach and how to write a useful brief.
AI Use-Case Discovery: Agenda and Prioritisation Template
Start from a task rather than a tool. Record the baseline, permitted inputs, expected output and owner; then use evidence and unresolved dependencies to decide what to test.