Decision inputs
Facts that change the policy answer
Within people and hr, this request uses verified employment details and the company reference policy to produce a reference draft. Both belong in the submission before any policy route is trusted.
- 1Task and owner
- Line manager wants to draft an employment reference. The policy check should identify who can approve, correct or withdraw a reference draft.
- 2Information involved
- Verified employment details and the company reference policy. Include attachments and connected sources when deciding the highest information classification.
- 3Tool and account
- An approved company account. Approval must cover the account and its settings, not merely the product name.
- 4Intended result
- The expected result is a reference draft. The policy needs to know what happens after generation, including publication, communication and automated use.
- 5Consequence if it is wrong
- The draft may disclose unapproved information or make unsupported judgements. That risk sets the level of review and the person who should receive an exception.
- 6Human review
- people policy owner should inspect, change, reject or stop the result. Make the review happen before reliance and give the reviewer a real way to stop the work.
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 company can consider a standard route where the exact account is approved, only the minimum employee personal information is used, a reference draft remains within the stated purpose, and people policy owner reviews it before use.
Approval may be required
A named reviewer should take over when the account or data handling is uncertain, the draft may disclose unapproved information or make unsupported judgements, or a reference draft reaches people or systems beyond the requester’s authority.
The request may need to stop or change
The policy may require another method where restricted information would enter an unapproved service, the output would act before people policy owner can intervene, or follow the approved reference scope and verify every factual statement cannot be maintained. Consider less information, a controlled account or a non-AI process.
Request checklist
Questions to ask before using the tool
- 01
Does the selected account retain or reuse anything supplied while trying to draft an employment reference?
- 02
Could verified employment details and the company reference policy be reduced to a short de-identified extract?
- 03
Will a reference draft remain working material, reach another person or make another system act?
- 04
What evidence will people policy owner use to accept, correct or reject the result?
- 05
Does the intended use extend beyond the region and audience covered by the current policy?
Worked request
What the employee should submit
This example supplies decision facts without pasting the underlying material into the approval record.
- requester
- line manager
- task
- Use AI to draft an employment reference.
- information
- verified employment details and the company reference policy
- tool
- An approved company account
- frequency
- Recurring work
- region
- Where the work and affected people are located
- purpose
- Draft or analyse
- impact
- External employment communication
- review
- Complete human review
- owner
- people policy owner
Useful safeguards
Controls that fit this request
- ✓
Follow the approved reference scope and verify every factual statement
- ✓
Keep whole files, mailboxes and datasets out of the prompt when a short part of verified employment details and the company reference policy is enough.
- ✓
Treat a new purpose, region, data source or recipient as a new request rather than silently extending this one.
- ✓
Link the completed check to the applicable policy version and append later reassessments separately.
Questions people ask
About this AI use
Is using AI to draft an employment reference automatically allowed?
Treat this as a request pattern. The authoritative answer comes from the current company policy and the employee’s completed submission.
Which facts should be submitted before work begins?
Describe a reference draft, identify verified employment details and the company reference policy, name the exact tool and account, explain who will receive or rely on the output, and state how people policy owner will review it.
Which evidence makes the answer reproducible?
Link the completed check to the applicable policy version and append later reassessments separately. A classification and controlled reference may be enough when copying verified employment details and the company reference policy would create unnecessary risk.