Start with actual usage
Employees try different tools, teams connect models to workflows and documentation falls behind. We gather use cases, providers, data flows and responsible people. Scope includes off-the-shelf tools and custom integrations.
AI use review
A technical and organisational AI review. An inventory of use cases, data flows, working rules and an implementation plan with clearly defined scope.
Discuss this service ↗30 minutes to discuss your needs and a next step. Work scope and pricing are agreed before we start.
Reply within 1 business day, scope and price proposal within 2 business days after the call, with the option to end the engagement after accepting the first stage.
Illustrative example
Employees try different tools, teams connect models to workflows and documentation falls behind. We gather use cases, providers, data flows and responsible people. Scope includes off-the-shelf tools and custom integrations.
This service examines AI already used in your company. To analyse time, errors and handoffs in 1 workflow, choose: Understand and simplify
The inventory and data map support decisions about specific use cases. Recommendations receive a priority and an implementation owner.
We prepare technical and organisational information for assessing AI usage and implement agreed requirements. Legal analysis, obligations in a specific situation and formal certification require a separate scope and an appropriate specialist. The SyncGrowth service is not ISO certification or a legal opinion.
We check whether rules are reflected in permissions, action approvals, incident handling and knowledge updates. Implementing changes can be a follow-on stage. Our experience includes work on AI Act matters for our own product in the context of its particular use case.
An owner notices staff using several assistants but does not know which company documents reach which tool. We record each use, provider, data category, task owner and method for checking output. We then organise access and prepare usable working rules. This example illustrates a possible problem.
We compare written rules with actual practice. We separate immediate improvements from decisions needing legal or data-protection expertise. The owner receives a decision list and assigned responsibilities.
Bring the teams and tools you know about to the initial call; the full inventory is built during the work. Appoint people with access to company workflows and rules. You decide who maintains the inventory and which recommendations come first. You do not need to inspect every account yourself. We agree on interviews, dates and your time commitment once the number of uses is clear.
Pricing depends on use-case count, documentation availability and review depth. We establish who updates the inventory when tools or workflows change. Acceptance means the agreed deliverables are complete and implementation tasks are verifiable.
FAQ
No. You receive a technical and organisational review and an action plan. Legal assessment requires an appropriate scope and specialist.
Yes. An inventory can be the first stage, with agreed fields, owners and update procedures.
The review establishes actual tools, data, ownership and gaps. Usage rules are one possible deliverable informed by that work. You can also draft a policy yourself using the guide.
No. We agree on a review scope with process owners and gather information from assigned staff. You approve priorities and the owner of future updates.
Reply within 1 business day, scope and price proposal within 2 business days after the call, with the option to end the engagement after accepting the first stage.