返回全部模板
Prova成果物
俾Marketing團隊用嘅AI工作流程審核模板
喺team承諾做pilot之前，梳理一個marketing工作流程，決定AI應該自動化、輔助、保護，定係唔應該碰。
適合想圍繞AI重新設計交付質素嘅agency leader · 揀緊第一個AI工作流程嘅marketing ops或analytics lead · 唔想零散AI實驗變成營運風險嘅senior marketer
模板欄位
- 工作流程階段
- 而家AI負責嘅部分
- 六個月後AI應該負責嘅部分
- 保留俾人做嘅部分同原因
- 倫理或營運風險：低、中、高
- 行動：自動化、輔助、保護、唔做
- pilot候選項目嘅ICE分數
填寫示例
Client reporting workflow for a paid media account.
下面嘅填寫示例會保留英文，因為Prova會用英文review提交嘅成果物。
Data extraction from ad platforms
Metric reconciliation
Anomaly detection
Insight drafting
Strategist review
Client-ready narrative
Follow-up action list
弱版本 vs 強版本
弱版本
- Workflow stage
- Reporting
- AI handles today
- AI writes reports
- Stays human
- Strategy
- Risk
- Medium
- Action
- Automate
| Workflow stage | Reporting |
|---|---|
| AI handles today | AI writes reports |
| Stays human | Strategy |
| Risk | Medium |
| Action | Automate |
點解唔夠好
- "Reporting" is too broad to audit.
- "Strategy" does not name the judgment point.
- It does not identify source systems, reconciliation risk, or who approves the client-facing narrative.
- Automating the whole workflow is unsafe because the work includes interpretation and client trust.
強版本
- Workflow stage
- Weekly paid media variance explanation for Meta, Google, and LinkedIn
- AI handles today
- Drafts first-pass variance notes from exported spend, revenue, CPA, and campaign-change logs
- AI should handle in six months
- Flags likely causes, drafts three audience-specific summaries, and proposes follow-up checks
- Stays human
- Strategist approves causal claims and client recommendation because platform data can be delayed or misleading
- Risk
- High for client narrative, medium for internal diagnosis
- Action
- Augment, with protected human approval before client send
| Workflow stage | Weekly paid media variance explanation for Meta, Google, and LinkedIn |
|---|---|
| AI handles today | Drafts first-pass variance notes from exported spend, revenue, CPA, and campaign-change logs |
| AI should handle in six months | Flags likely causes, drafts three audience-specific summaries, and proposes follow-up checks |
| Stays human | Strategist approves causal claims and client recommendation because platform data can be delayed or misleading |
| Risk | High for client narrative, medium for internal diagnosis |
| Action | Augment, with protected human approval before client send |
點解有效
- The stage is specific.
- Source systems are named.
- The human judgment point is explicit.
- Risk differs by use case.
- The action is narrow enough to pilot.
Prova會審視泛用AI成日漏咗嘅位
- Whether the workflow scope is specific enough to audit
- Whether "stays human" reasons are concrete or just polite language
- Whether high-risk stages are incorrectly classified as automate
- Whether ICE scores are supported by operational reality
- Whether the selected pilot is narrow enough to test
- Whether the next sprint should be measurement, rollout, or foundation repair
下一步
想攞feedback？Prova會先做一個短assessment，令review標準配合你嘅角色、目標同第一批受眾。之後你會入去適合而家工作嘅sprint。
Prova暫時只提供英文版。
提交前：請移除客戶名、保密數字，同任何team唔想存入訓練或教練系統嘅資料。
前往英文版Prova