A common theme that keeps popping up when I talk to business owners about AI:
There is rarely a defined or consistent standard for what good AI adoption looks like.
One person has it built into every part of their workday. Another uses it occasionally when they remember. Someone else hasn't touched it in weeks.
Same company. Same tools. Different behavior.
The teams I've seen get the most out of AI are usually the ones sharing what's working.
They share strong outputs.
They swap prompts.
They talk openly about useful workflows.
That gives the rest of the team a much clearer sense of what good looks like and where AI actually fits into the work.
Typically, when a company onboards a new tool, there's some training, a rollout, and a way to make sure everyone's using it consistently.
AI has largely skipped that step for a lot of teams. Often it's a bit of a free-for-all.
A few questions worth asking internally:
Have you set expectations around how your team should be using these tools?
Is anyone actually sharing what's working?
Does the team have a shared sense of what a good AI output looks like vs. a mediocre one?
Give the same task to a few people, see how they vary in their approaches, and then compare the outputs side by side. It gets revealing fast.
This doesn't have to be a 40-page AI handbook.
But if everyone on your team was using AI as effectively as your current power user, what would the impact on your business look like?
Probably enough to justify setting a clearer standard.