AI strategy clarification based on the ARTS model
Advisory for boards and leadership teams that must set the direction for AI. We work our way through the four decisions of the ARTS model – Ambition, Roles, Training and Shared rules – and you leave with a direction that can be said out loud.
Direction is a leadership decision – not a choice of vendor.
Most organisations are not short of speed. Experiments are running, licences are being bought and tools are being tested in every corner. What is missing is direction: a shared answer to what AI should do for the organisation – and what it should not. No vendor can give you that answer. It is a leadership decision, and it needs a room where it can be made.
A draft of your ground rules – in a form that can be considered and adopted.
The ambition and the roles translated into prioritised initiatives with owners and milestones.
Linked to Article 4 of the EU AI Act – the requirement for AI literacy among everyone who works with AI.
For boards and leadership teams
Advisory for boards, executive teams and leadership groups that must set the direction for AI on the organisation's behalf – in private companies, public organisations and member organisations. One managing director of a medium-sized consultancy described it like this after their strategy workshop: "We came in with a list of tools and left with three decisions. It was the first time AI felt like something we were steering ourselves."
Example of a workshop programme
The day follows the ARTS modelThe ARTS model – the backbone of the work
When I work with AI strategy, I use my own ARTS model as the backbone. I have developed it through my advisory work and teaching, and it gathers the four decisions an AI strategy must contain:
- Ambition – what do we want from AI, and what do we not want.
- Roles – which role should AI play in which tasks, and who is responsible.
- Training – what do people need to master, and how are they trained in it, for the ambition to be realised.
- Ground rules – what may AI be used for, what may it not, and what must never be shared.
The four elements belong together: the ambition sets the direction, the roles and competencies make it possible, and the ground rules keep it accountable. The workshop is built over exactly that sequence.
Why most AI strategies end up as technology lists
Many AI strategies begin with the tools: which licences, which vendors, which pilot projects. The result is a technology list that is out of date within six months – and that no one in leadership feels ownership of. A durable AI strategy begins somewhere else: with the purpose. Which tasks, which professional expertise and which relationships should AI strengthen? Only when that is answered does it make sense to choose technology. Purpose before technology – that is the whole difference.
»We came in with a list of tools and left with three decisions. It was the first time AI felt like strategy.«
The workshop has been run for boards and leadership teams in private companies, public organisations and member organisations.
Key questions
PracticalitiesWhat does an AI strategy workshop cost?
The price depends on the scope of the preparation and on how much follow-up you want – from a single day with materials to a programme with anchoring. Get in touch, and you will have a concrete price after a short conversation.
How long does the process take?
The workshop itself is one day. With preparation and follow-up, allow three to four weeks from the first conversation until the material is ready for consideration by leadership.
What is the difference between an AI strategy and a digitalisation strategy?
A digitalisation strategy is about systems and processes – what gets implemented and when. An AI strategy is about judgement: where the technology may think alongside you, what that means for professional expertise and responsibility, and who decides. The two must work together, but neither can replace the other.
Does the whole executive team have to take part?
Ideally, yes. An AI strategy must be owned by the people who carry the responsibility – a single director cannot commit the rest. The board does not need to sit in on the day; it is brought in through the decision paper.