AI Champions Training Programme

Champions support peer learning; they should not become an unofficial help desk for every AI problem. The role needs protected time, a manager and a clear boundary. A champion can demonstrate an approved workflow, help a colleague check an output and collect recurring questions. They do not approve new tools, interpret legal obligations or grant access merely because they are confident with prompts. Paloren defines those responsibilities with the programme owner. A small company may need one nominated person; a larger organisation needs coverage across departments, working hours and accessibility, not just its loudest enthusiasts. Programmes run 6 weeks from USD 12k. Champions commit 2 hours per week to their support role, with their manager confirming that time is protected. The first two weeks cover the role charter, acceptable-use boundaries and a teach-back exercise. Weeks three and four introduce workflow documentation and feedback practice. Weeks five and six measure impact, refine the library and plan ongoing champion support.

• Role charter with protected time and manager support
• Peer support separated from policy and access decisions
• Coverage plan based on real working patterns

Champions need to help another person learn without taking over the keyboard or hiding a mistake. The training agenda includes explaining an approved workflow, asking diagnostic questions and giving feedback against a simple rubric. Participants practise a short teaching session using a worked example task, then observe how a colleague interprets their instructions. A deliberately flawed output creates an opportunity to explain checking without embarrassment or blame. Prerequisites include baseline literacy, approved tool access and willingness to support others. Deep technical expertise is not required. Tool-specific gaps are addressed separately so the champion programme can concentrate on facilitation, consistent review and useful escalation.

• Short teach-back using a worked example workflow
• Feedback practice with a clear review rubric
• Diagnostic questions that preserve learner ownership

An internal workflow library needs selection and maintenance, not unlimited submissions. Champions record the task, permitted inputs, required sources, expected output and review owner for each example. They test instructions beyond the original case and note where the method should not be used. Customer data and credentials do not belong in shared examples. A lightweight submission process lets colleagues contribute while someone remains responsible for review and retirement. In training, participants improve a poorly documented example and reject one that crosses policy, establishing a quality standard before the library grows.

• Workflow submission and acceptance checklist
• Safe example with limits and source requirements
• Owner and review date for each published method

Champions are assessed through practical teach-back, workflow review and an escalation scenario. The follow-up looks at whether colleagues can apply the method and whether questions reach the right owner. It should not reward the number of prompts shared or create competition over tool usage. Repeated access problems go to administrators; unclear rules go to governance owners; broken processes go to managers. The programme owner reviews champion workload and makes space for refresher learning. Wider behaviour change may need an adoption engagement alongside the network. Training can establish the role and skills, but it cannot substitute for management support or a functioning route to resolve problems.

• Teach-back and escalation assessment
• Recurring-obstacle log with responsible owners
• Follow-up on peer learning and champion workload