Sidekick / Your AI overviewSpend your report time on the decision, not assembling the pages.
Three possible uses based on your answers, with a finished example you can try.
See the finished example
What your answers point to
Reports and proposals both require you to assemble evidence before making a judgment. AI can prepare that material and flag contradictions, leaving you to assess the findings, shape the offer and approve what goes out. Capture an experienced person's example so others can use the same approach.
Three ways to put AI to work
The starting example addresses work you named. It reuses context across a complete piece of work and makes missing or conflicting details easier to inspect.
- Build the report that tells you what needs attention
- The work
- AI can combine sales exports and campaign results into a report with charts, changes and questions to investigate. Check its figures against the original records.
- What changes
- A repeatable report you can produce in-house, with your review focused on the numbers and the next decision.
- Build the proposal and delivery plan together
- The work
- AI can use discovery notes, your service options and a past proposal to draft the scope, approach, client responsibilities and delivery plan. It can show which decisions still need you.
- What changes
- Less time rebuilding documents. More attention on whether the offer solves the right problem and can be delivered profitably.
- Turn meeting decisions into a working plan
- The work
- AI can combine a meeting transcript with the current project plan, identify changed decisions and prepare the follow-up, task list and revised brief. It can show where a new deadline conflicts with unfinished work.
- What changes
- The team leaves with work prepared and conflicts visible, instead of another set of notes someone must turn into a plan.
See the finished work
Illustration · Fictional service business
Website enquiries doubled while sales stayed flat. Before increasing spend again, check lead quality and response delays.
Channel performance · August → September
| Channel | Enquiries | Sales | Sale rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Referrals | 10 → 8 | 5 → 4 | 50% → 50% |
| Website | 20 → 40 | 4 → 4 | 20% → 10% |
| Events | 6 → 8 | 2 → 2 | 33.3% → 25% |
See the complete output
Budget decision
Hold the proposed doubling of website spend pending a short review. Recorded website cost per sale rose from CAD 200 to CAD 400 while sales stayed at four. More enquiries have not yet translated into more sales. This does not establish profitability or prove which factor caused the change.
Resolve before the next report
- The September channel rows total 10 sales, while the dashboard says 12. Reconcile the two extra sales and their source before using the dashboard total.
- Review September website enquiries by campaign: qualified, unqualified, no response and still open. Separate lead quality from leads that have not yet had time to close.
- Review the increase in median first-response time from 4 to 19 hours. Assign enquiry coverage and compare response times and sales progression during the next reporting period.
What remains uncertain
The campaign and response delays both changed. These records do not isolate their effects. Referral costs are missing, and channel costs exclude other business expenses. A definitive channel-profit ranking would be unsupported.
See the source material and try it
This is a worked illustration with fictional inputs. The output was produced and edited for this example; your AI tool may produce a different version.
Copy this fictional example
Copy the notes and instructions into an approved AI chat.
Check the result
Current rows total 10 sales, not 12. Website conversion halves and recorded cost per sale doubles. Neither the cause nor profit is established.
Before trying this with real work, confirm that the AI tool may use those records and that someone can check important mistakes. Otherwise, keep using fictional details.
Try a completed reporting period with the original exports, costs and operational notes. Check the report’s conclusions as well as its calculations.
Before using real work
Check the limits first: you said the work involves a lot of private information.
For work with private information, use made-up examples until this use is approved. Keep each client's information separate.
Try real work only where someone can spot an important mistake. A person must approve messages, spending and promises. Set a spend limit.
Check who can read saved data and when it is deleted. Check that people can spot errors before wider use.
Make this useful in your work
Check which AI tools your Microsoft setup allows for this work. Start with one team. Agree on one finished example and checking method before sharing the process. Compare examples colleagues have already tried. Name who keeps instructions current.
Use your next available weekly slot for the example. Agree the proposed use with IT before connecting anything.
A starting point, not a business audit
Based on your answers, not a business audit. Your files, software and permissions have not been checked; results are not promised.
With help, you keep the setup and instructions. Coaching ends; software costs and upkeep remain.