Isn't teaching the whole company the policy too expensive?
Yes, and the expense is the point. Senior time spent teaching is the signal that the policy matters. The cheap alternative, a PDF on a shared drive, is what produces a policy nobody follows.
Yes. It is expensive, and that is not a flaw in the plan. It is the plan.
A senior leader spending hours teaching an AI policy in person, in small doses, is costly, and the cost is exactly what carries the message. Spending it says, at a level no email can, that this matters and that the person accountable for it will sit with you and answer your question to your face. The “cheap” alternative, shipping the policy to a shared drive and linking it in a deck, is not actually cheaper. It just moves the cost somewhere you cannot see it: into the gap between a policy that exists and a policy people follow, where good people default to responsible conservatism and quietly decide on their own what is allowed.
So do not price it as training overhead. Price it as the difference between a policy that works and a document that does not. Two things make the spend finite. The questions you collect while teaching become FAQs that make each session faster than the last. And you are not buying a permanent line item: you teach until the knowledge has spread far enough that the organization can teach itself, then you wire acceptance into onboarding and step back. If no one senior will spend the hours at all, you do not have an enablement plan. You have a PDF. The worked example is in A Policy Is Only as Good as It Is Understood.
Cheers,
-Titus
Get it in your inbox.
New Issues, FAQs, and Case Studies as they go out. Each one names something, explains something, or hands you something you can use on Monday. Subscribe, and I will send each as it goes out.
Prefer the tool you already think in? Here is how to read it in your chatbot.