Decision inputs
Facts that change the policy answer
For this request, session notes, agreed goals and observed practice is the input boundary and a feedback draft for the learner is the output boundary. A useful check makes both explicit.
- 1Task and owner
- Workplace coach wants to draft coaching feedback. The policy check should identify who can approve, correct or withdraw a feedback draft for the learner.
- 2Information involved
- Session notes, agreed goals and observed practice. Include attachments and connected sources when deciding the highest information classification.
- 3Tool and account
- An approved company account. The request should identify the exact account because product-level approval leaves important controls unknown.
- 4Intended result
- The expected result is a feedback draft for the learner. Its destination matters: private working material creates a different consequence from a sent, published or automated result.
- 5Consequence if it is wrong
- The model may overstate a weakness or expose private coaching notes. This is the fact most likely to move the request from routine handling into review.
- 6Human review
- coach responsible for the session should inspect, change, reject or stop the result. A final glance after an automatic action would not give that owner meaningful control.
Possible policy routes
The task name alone cannot decide it.
A published workplace policy can return different answers for the same task. These are the practical branches worth encoding.
A routine policy route may be possible
The least restrictive path starts only after the exact account is approved, only the minimum employee personal information is used, a feedback draft for the learner remains within the stated purpose, and coach responsible for the session reviews it before use.
Approval may be required
Specialist approval becomes relevant if the account or data handling is uncertain, the model may overstate a weakness or expose private coaching notes, or a feedback draft for the learner reaches people or systems beyond the requester’s authority.
The request may need to stop or change
Do not continue unchanged when restricted information would enter an unapproved service, the output would act before coach responsible for the session can intervene, or use observed examples and let the coach own the final feedback cannot be maintained. Consider less information, a controlled account or a non-AI process.
Request checklist
Questions to ask before using the tool
- 01
Is the exact account approved for draft coaching feedback, including its plug-ins and connected sources?
- 02
Can any personal, sensitive, confidential or secret part of session notes, agreed goals and observed practice be removed?
- 03
Could someone treat a feedback draft for the learner as final even though it was generated as assistance?
- 04
Who replaces coach responsible for the session when the request falls outside ordinary expertise?
- 05
Would another region, audience or frequency activate a different company rule?
Worked request
What the employee should submit
This example supplies decision facts without pasting the underlying material into the approval record.
- requester
- workplace coach
- task
- Use AI to draft coaching feedback.
- information
- session notes, agreed goals and observed practice
- tool
- An approved company account
- frequency
- Recurring work
- region
- Where the work and affected people are located
- purpose
- Draft or analyse
- impact
- Employee development
- review
- Complete human review
- owner
- coach responsible for the session
Useful safeguards
Controls that fit this request
- ✓
Use observed examples and let the coach own the final feedback
- ✓
Separate source material from the request record and expose only what the tool needs for a feedback draft for the learner.
- ✓
Set an expiry or review point when recurring work turns into a permanent process.
- ✓
Record the request and reviewer without copying unnecessary parts of session notes, agreed goals and observed practice into the audit trail.
Questions people ask
About this AI use
Is using AI to draft coaching feedback automatically allowed?
Permission depends on the facts submitted for this request. A different tool, information class, region or use of a feedback draft for the learner can produce another route.
How specific should the workplace AI request be?
Describe a feedback draft for the learner, identify session notes, agreed goals and observed practice, name the exact tool and account, explain who will receive or rely on the output, and state how coach responsible for the session will review it.
What should remain after the decision?
Record the request and reviewer without copying unnecessary parts of session notes, agreed goals and observed practice into the audit trail. A classification and controlled reference may be enough when copying session notes, agreed goals and observed practice would create unnecessary risk.