Analyse, Compare & Audit Consistently
I can use AI to analyse evidence against a clear question, compare options using the same criteria, and audit work against explicit rules rather than vague judgement.
I can use AI to analyse evidence against a clear question, compare options using the same criteria, and audit work against explicit rules rather than vague judgement.
Required: computer or phone with AI/GPT for the live prompting route. Bring your own small work task or use the starter case. Your course playbook should be open for notes.
Follow the session exercise, run only the text explicitly marked as a prompting activity, inspect the result and record evidence in your session card.
A completed session card, a checked result or decision, and an update to your Personal AI Work Playbook.
Explanations and workbook templates are not prompts. Prompting activities are labelled explicitly.
THREE BITES. ONE PRACTICAL MOVE.
What you'll practise
- Turn messy information into a clear analysis question.
- Compare alternatives against the same criteria.
- Audit claims and gaps using explicit rules and evidence.
Consistent analysis starts with a clear question and explicit criteria.
Try it with the supplied case
Question: Can AI help me make a fair comparison? Input: S5.
- In 4 minutes inspect “B is cheaper and will arrive in time.” Mark what is known versus missing.
- In 12 minutes compare total cost, lead time and stock evidence using the same criteria for both offers. Check one calculation yourself.
- Reveal B's RM180 delivery and ten-day lead time. In 12 minutes revise the recommendation for the eight-day requirement and state the trade-off.
Keep/check: A RM3,980; B RM3,930 after reveal. A meets the stated time requirement; B is cheaper but late. Preserve unknowns before the reveal. Transfer the comparison method back to own work even if it uses a different task.
ANALYSIS QUESTION CARD
Use this as your session notes and evidence. Do not paste the whole card into AI. Only text explicitly labelled Prompting exercise belongs in an AI chat.
ANALYSIS CARD Question: ______________________________________________________ Evidence: ______________________________________________________ Scope included / excluded: ______________________________________________________ Criteria: ______________________________________________________ COMPARISON RUBRIC Option A: __________________ Option B: __________________ Criterion 1: _______________ Evidence: __________________ Criterion 2: _______________ Evidence: __________________ Criterion 3: _______________ Evidence: __________________ AUDIT CHECKLIST Gap found: ______________________________________________________ Contradiction: ______________________________________________________ Unsupported claim: ______________________________________________________ Fix needed: ______________________________________________________ PROOF One issue detected using an explicit criterion: ______________________________________________________ RETURN TO MY QUESTION Status: answered / demonstrated / needs more evidence / outside this course Evidence or gap: Next application: