Decision inputs
Facts that change the policy answer
Within research and analytics, this request uses public product pages, documentation and pricing to produce a competitor capability comparison. Both belong in the submission before any policy route is trusted.
- 1Task and owner
- Strategy analyst wants to compare competitor products. Record the person who will stand behind a competitor capability comparison after the tool has finished.
- 2Information involved
- Public product pages, documentation and pricing. 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 competitor capability comparison. Follow the result to its real endpoint so the request captures its practical effect.
- 5Consequence if it is wrong
- Marketing claims and plan limits can be mistaken for verified product behaviour. Use this consequence to distinguish a routine request from one needing specialist approval.
- 6Human review
- strategy 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 request may fit ordinary policy handling once the exact account is approved, only the minimum public information is used, a competitor capability comparison remains within the stated purpose, and strategy owner reviews it before use.
Approval may be required
Send the request for approval if the account or data handling is uncertain, marketing claims and plan limits can be mistaken for verified product behaviour, or a competitor capability comparison 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 strategy owner can intervene, or date every source and distinguish observed features from vendor claims cannot be maintained. Consider less information, a controlled account or a non-AI process.
Request checklist
Questions to ask before using the tool
- 01
Will compare competitor products run inside the approved company environment from start to finish?
- 02
What is the most sensitive element in public product pages, documentation and pricing, and does the tool need it?
- 03
Who receives a competitor capability comparison, and what will they do with it?
- 04
What evidence will strategy 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
- strategy analyst
- task
- Use AI to compare competitor products.
- information
- public product pages, documentation and pricing
- tool
- An approved company account
- frequency
- Recurring work
- region
- Where the work and affected people are located
- purpose
- Analyse
- impact
- Internal work
- review
- Complete human review
- owner
- strategy owner
Useful safeguards
Controls that fit this request
- ✓
Date every source and distinguish observed features from vendor claims
- ✓
Keep whole files, mailboxes and datasets out of the prompt when a short part of public product pages, documentation and pricing is enough.
- ✓
Reassess the request whenever its tool, information classification, frequency or consequence changes.
- ✓
Keep the submitted facts, strategy owner’s decision and the exact published policy version.
Questions people ask
About this AI use
Is using AI to compare competitor products automatically allowed?
Treat this as a request pattern. The authoritative answer comes from the current company policy and the employee’s completed submission.
What belongs in the employee’s request?
Describe a competitor capability comparison, identify public product pages, documentation and pricing, name the exact tool and account, explain who will receive or rely on the output, and state how strategy owner will review it.
Which evidence makes the answer reproducible?
Keep the submitted facts, strategy owner’s decision and the exact published policy version. A classification and controlled reference may be enough when copying public product pages, documentation and pricing would create unnecessary risk.