AI Policy

• Drafting and thinking. I use AI tools to draft, research, structure and pressure-test my own writing and materials. Everything published under my name has been read, edited and approved by me.
• Research. For market and competitor work, checked against original sources rather than taken on trust.
• Building systems. The tools and automations set up for clients often use AI as a component — for drafting replies, sorting enquiries, answering routine questions.

I ask clients to expect a straight answer about which tools their data touches, so here are mine.

• Claude (Anthropic) — drafting, research, analysis, and the reasoning behind the Business Leak Check
• ChatGPT (OpenAI) — occasional drafting and comparison
• Lovable — building this site and the tools on it
• Supabase — storing what the forms collect
• MailerLite and Resend — email
• Microsoft 365 — email and documents
• GoHighLevel is one possible platform for customer systems and automation. Tools are selected according to the business need, existing systems and agreed requirements. More complex technical implementation may involve specialist support, with responsibilities and access agreed before work begins.

Client work may use different tools where the job needs them. You’ll be told which before anything is built, and it goes in writing.

• Anything I send you, or publish, or put my name to.
• Every recommendation about your business. A diagnostic can narrow the question; it doesn’t make the decision, and neither does a model.
• Any judgement about whether something should be automated at all.

I won’t put your customers’ personal information into a general-purpose AI tool without agreeing it with you first, in writing, and only where the tool’s terms allow it.

I won’t build a system that makes the final decision about a person—who receives a service, what they’re charged, whether they’re hired or how a complaint is handled. AI may help organise information or support the administrative work, but a named person with appropriate authority must consider the wider context and make the decision themselves.

I won’t build an AI that pretends to be human. Any chat or voice agent I set up says clearly that it’s automated, and can hand over to a real person when someone asks or when it’s out of its depth.

I won’t write fake reviews, testimonials, case studies or results, with AI or otherwise. If I quote a client, they said it and they’ve approved it.

I won’t automate something that’s working. Adding AI to a process that already runs reliably adds cost and fragility for no gain, and I’ll tell you when that’s the situation even though it means selling you less.

AI tools and platforms change, and a system that worked as intended when it was built may need to be reviewed later.

A review is needed when a platform changes materially, the business begins using the system for a different purpose, new information is introduced or someone reports an unexpected result. Systems involving AI should have a documented way to pause them while a problem is investigated.

Where I continue to support a system, the review and support arrangements are agreed in writing. Where the business manages it independently, the handover explains what should be checked, when to review it and who is responsible.