Decision inputs
Facts that change the policy answer
The working material is performance evidence, role requirements and career history; the intended result is a promotion recommendation. Recording that pair prevents a vague approval from spreading to other uses.
- 1Task and owner
- Department manager wants to recommend an employee for promotion. The policy check should identify who can approve, correct or withdraw a promotion recommendation.
- 2Information involved
- Performance evidence, role requirements and career history. 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 promotion recommendation. Record the audience and the next system in the chain, rather than describing the output only as a draft.
- 5Consequence if it is wrong
- Historic opportunity and subjective language can reproduce unequal treatment. This is the fact most likely to move the request from routine handling into review.
- 6Human review
- promotion panel should inspect, change, reject or stop the result. Their role should include checking source facts, correcting errors and refusing the proposed use.
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 lower-friction route begins when the exact account is approved, only the minimum employee personal information is used, a promotion recommendation remains within the stated purpose, and promotion panel reviews it before use.
Approval may be required
Specialist approval becomes relevant if the account or data handling is uncertain, historic opportunity and subjective language can reproduce unequal treatment, or a promotion recommendation reaches people or systems beyond the requester’s authority.
The request may need to stop or change
The company may need a safer design when restricted information would enter an unapproved service, the output would act before promotion panel can intervene, or use consistent evidence and keep the panel accountable for the decision 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 recommend an employee for promotion?
- 02
Does the proposed input include more of performance evidence, role requirements and career history than the result actually requires?
- 03
At what point does a promotion recommendation move beyond the requester’s private draft?
- 04
Does promotion panel have enough authority and time to stop the result?
- 05
Which change in tool, data, purpose or impact would require a fresh request?
Worked request
What the employee should submit
This example supplies decision facts without pasting the underlying material into the approval record.
- requester
- department manager
- task
- Use AI to recommend an employee for promotion.
- information
- performance evidence, role requirements and career history
- tool
- An approved company account
- frequency
- Recurring work
- region
- Where the work and affected people are located
- purpose
- Analyse
- impact
- Employment decision
- review
- Complete human review
- owner
- promotion panel
Useful safeguards
Controls that fit this request
- ✓
Use consistent evidence and keep the panel accountable for the decision
- ✓
Start with a de-identified sample of performance evidence, role requirements and career history before considering broader access.
- ✓
Keep the use within analyse and run another check if the audience, tool or intended effect changes.
- ✓
Preserve who accepted a promotion recommendation, when they did so and which rule version they applied.
Questions people ask
About this AI use
Is using AI to recommend an employee for promotion automatically allowed?
The company policy supplies the answer after it receives the real tool, data, purpose, impact and review plan. This page only prepares those facts.
How specific should the workplace AI request be?
Describe a promotion recommendation, identify performance evidence, role requirements and career history, name the exact tool and account, explain who will receive or rely on the output, and state how promotion panel will review it.
What should remain after the decision?
Preserve who accepted a promotion recommendation, when they did so and which rule version they applied. A classification and controlled reference may be enough when copying performance evidence, role requirements and career history would create unnecessary risk.