I turned the playful idea of “burger prompting” into a rigorous framework for building an AI resume coach that delivers consistent, high‑quality guidance. In product management, repeatability matters: I want dependable LLM behavior, tight control of outputs, and measurable outcomes. This approach gives me exactly that—clear roles, crisp constraints, and an evaluation loop that raises the quality bar with each iteration.
Here’s the metaphor in practice. The top bun sets the role and goal; the middle layers stack context, examples, constraints, and tools; the patty is the core algorithm and output schema; and the bottom bun locks in the quality bar and follow-up behavior. When I apply this structure to an AI resume coach, I get results that feel expert, empathetic, and actionable—without rewriting the prompt every time.
Top bun: I define the system role and success criteria. I’ll say, “Act as an experienced hiring manager and resume coach for SaaS product roles” and specify the north star: improve clarity, impact, and ATS alignment without fabricating experience. I also name the audience (mid-career PMs, early-career candidates, or executives) so tone and calibration stay consistent across sessions.
First layer: I load precise context. That includes the candidate’s resume, the target job description, and any constraints (for example: keep bullets under 22 words, lead with impact, quantify outcomes). I also clarify non-goals (no inflated titles, no unverifiable claims). This is where I set the voice: confident, concise, and supportive, not generic or robotic.
Second layer: I attach the tools and references that anchor outputs. A skill taxonomy for product roles, a style guide for resume bullets, and a scoring rubric (impact, clarity, relevance, keyword coverage) help the model prioritize. To protect quality, I call out context window management rules—what to include or trim—and how to summarize long inputs without losing signal.
Third layer: I add exemplars. Few-shot examples of excellent resume bullets (“before” and “after”) teach the model what “great” looks like. I also include a counterexample or two to prevent bad habits (for instance, over-indexing on buzzwords). Exemplars act like taste buds; they steer nuance without overfitting.
Patty: I define the core algorithm and the output schema. The algorithm moves in stages: diagnose the resume against the job, identify 3–5 high-leverage improvements, rewrite bullets with quantified outcomes, and propose a summary that highlights relevant wins. I then specify the output sections: a brief diagnosis, rewritten bullets mapped to the job’s requirements, an ATS keyword coverage table, and a confidence score with rationale. A tight schema produces consistent, scannable outputs that are easy to evaluate—and easy to ship.
Bottom bun: I lock in the quality bar and the follow-up behavior. If inputs are incomplete, the coach must ask clarifying questions before rewriting. If claims lack evidence, it should suggest proof points (metrics, scope, stakeholders) rather than embellish. Finally, I require a self-check pass where the coach verifies that each bullet demonstrates impact, relevance, and clarity before presenting the final result.
Implementation blueprint: I create a reusable prompt template with clear system and user sections, then parameterize it for different roles (PM, design, data). If I have a library of style guides or skill matrices, I wire it into a retrieval layer so the model references the right material for each job. This setup makes the coach portable across tools and easy to maintain as the taxonomy evolves.
Evaluation and iteration: I practice eval-driven development. I assemble a small, representative test set of resumes and job descriptions, define acceptance criteria (readability score, keyword coverage, human rater alignment), and A/B test prompt variants. I track drift and tighten the schema whenever outputs start to meander. The goal isn’t just impressive demos—it’s reliable performance at scale.
Governance guardrails: A trustworthy resume coach respects privacy-by-design. I strip PII where possible, avoid storing raw resumes beyond what’s necessary, and document bias checks so advice doesn’t disadvantage non-traditional candidates. Clear data governance and risk management keep the product shippable and compliant as it grows.
When I apply burger prompting end to end, the AI resume coach becomes a repeatable system: fast, accurate, and measurably helpful. The structure teaches the model how to behave; the evals keep it honest; and the schema makes the result easy to review, refine, and ship. If you want dependable LLM outcomes, start with a great bun—and don’t skimp on the patty.
I spend my days partnering with technical leaders who bridge invention and impact. The role of a Senior Software Engineer at Amplitude working on AI-powered products epitomizes how engineering and product fuse to ship customer value with speed, safety, and conviction. In my world, that fusion isn’t accidental—it’s designed, measured, and relentlessly improved.
When I form product trios—engineering, product, and design—we clarify the problem, the target users, and the measurable outcomes before a single line of code ships. This is how empowered product teams operate: we trade feature wish-lists for hypotheses, align on success metrics, and commit to learning loops that turn ambiguity into progress.
On the technical front, modern AI systems demand a retrieval-first pipeline, robust data contracts, and a thoughtful orchestration layer for LLMs. I expect eval-driven development to be first-class: offline unit-style evals for prompts and policies, and online evals that track behavior changes and quality at scale. This rigor gives us confidence to ship, learn, and iterate without burning cycles on guesswork.
Velocity matters, and so does reliability. I look for CI/CD that makes small, safe, frequent releases the default, and for DORA metrics to shine a light on delivery health. Pair that with platform scalability, clear SLOs, and pragmatic SRE practices, and teams earn the right to move fast without breaking trust.
Responsible AI is non-negotiable. We operationalize AI risk management with guardrails, input/output filters, red-teaming, and human-in-the-loop review where stakes are high. Data governance and privacy-by-design ensure that our creativity never outruns our compliance—because durable products are built on durable trust.
Impact comes from evidence. I advocate for disciplined A/B testing, careful minimum detectable effect (MDE) planning, and retention analysis that ties feature work to real business outcomes. Clear analytics pipelines and transparent dashboards keep stakeholders aligned and make good decisions repeatable.
Ultimately, the Senior Software Engineer I want to collaborate with is a builder who balances systems thinking with customer empathy: someone who can design reliable architectures, instrument the work with meaningful evals, and co-lead discovery to de-risk the roadmap. When we combine that mindset with crisp execution, AI-powered products stop being demos—and start becoming indispensable.
Inspired by this post on Amplitude – Perspectives.
When a customer reports a stolen credit card, the frontline play seems straightforward—freeze it. But that’s just the visible tip of a much larger customer support iceberg. Underneath sits the real work: dispute filings, fraud investigations, merchant communications, proactive outreach, and follow-ups that unfold over days across multiple systems. Most AI support tools only touch the surface; they don’t coordinate or close the loop. That gap is exactly where my product instincts kick in—and why this story matters.
I recently listened to a conversation with Jack Taylor (Product Engineer) and Ibrahim Faruqi (AI Engineer) from Gradient Labs, an AI-native startup building agents that automate the full scope of customer support in fintech. Their approach resonated with the challenges I see every day in customer support automation: fragmented workflows, regulatory complexity, and the need for human-in-the-loop moments. Gradient Labs has architected a platform with three coordinating agents—"inbound, back office, and outbound"—all built on a shared foundation of "natural language procedures, modular skills, and configurable guardrails."
What impressed me most was how they "Let non-technical subject matter experts define agent behavior through natural language procedures—no coding required." That’s a powerful way to remove engineering bottlenecks, accelerate iteration, and keep the domain experts—those closest to fraud, disputes, and compliance—directly in control. In my experience, this design choice alone can compress lead times from weeks to hours and aligns perfectly with continuous discovery and eval-driven development.
At the heart of their platform is orchestration. They "Architected a state machine orchestrator that manages turns, triggers, and skill selection across long-running conversations." That "turn" architecture is built for the messy reality of async, multi-day support. They treat "Skills as modular agent capabilities—and how they're scoped deterministically per turn," ensuring the system stays predictable and auditable. They also confront a nuanced challenge most teams dodge: "Defining "done" for outbound agents when the customer isn't the one ending the conversation." That’s where deterministic criteria, timers, and clearly scoped outcomes matter as much as the model beneath.
Compliance is not an afterthought—it’s baked into the core. Gradient Labs "Built guardrails as binary classifiers with eval pipelines, tuning for high recall on critical regulatory checks." In regulated domains, optimizing for recall on high-stakes checks is the right call; you can tolerate a few extra reviews, but you can’t miss a potential fraud signal. More broadly, they frame "Guardrails as classification problems: balancing recall and precision for regulatory compliance." That mindset is exactly how I like to merge AI risk management with product velocity.
Crucially, they avoid the trap of fully autonomous optimism. "Ask a Human: a tool call that brings humans into the loop for approvals or missing APIs" gives the system a safety valve for novel or high-risk cases. I also appreciated the explicit "Ask A Human Tool" pattern, which cleanly integrates approvals, policy exceptions, or data gaps without derailing the workflow.
Quality doesn’t happen by accident. They "Designed an auto-eval system that samples conversations for human review to catch edge cases and build labeled datasets" and built "Auto-eval pipelines that flag conversations for manual review and feed labeled datasets." That closed-loop evaluation flow is the backbone of sustainable performance in agentic AI. Combine this with targeted instrumentation—think CSAT, first contact resolution, deflection rate, time to resolution, and escalation rate—and you get a real Agent Analytics discipline, not just logs and dashboards.
The "iceberg" metaphor is more than a catchy visual. It’s a blueprint for scoping multi-agent platforms that work across the entire customer journey. With "inbound, back office, and outbound" agents coordinating on complex tasks like fraud disputes, the system can transition cleanly from intake to investigation to resolution—without dropping context or asking customers to repeat themselves. This is what genuine customer support automation looks like when it’s grounded in real operations.
Under the hood, the team leans into robust design choices that matter at scale: the "Complexities of Natural Language Input" are managed with explicit state and skill scoping, "Deterministic Skill Execution" reduces flakiness, and "Customer-Specific Guardrails" ensure compliance remains aligned to each client’s policies. Add their focus on "APIs and Customer Tools Integration" and the result is a platform that can actually take action—not just answer questions.
If you’re building in this space, here’s how I’d apply these lessons. Start by mapping the iceberg: enumerate back-office steps, approvals, and SLAs that follow the initial customer touchpoint. Capture those steps as "natural language procedures" owned by SMEs. Implement a "state machine orchestrator" to manage "turns, triggers, and skill selection" across multi-day workflows. Treat "guardrails as classification problems" and tune for high recall on high-stakes checks. Introduce "Ask a Human" early to handle missing APIs or policy exceptions. Finally, operationalize learning with "auto-eval pipelines" and tight, eval-driven development loops. That’s how multi-agent platforms deliver measurable outcomes in fintech support.
If you want to hear the full conversation, you can listen on Spotify or Apple Podcasts. You’ll also hear a nod to the "Incident.io episode – Referenced in the conversation," and a thoughtful take on the "Future of Multi-Agent Systems."
In short: this is a shift from simple Q&A bots to agents that can coordinate, comply, and complete. It’s the kind of multi-agent platform work that moves the needle for customer support in fintech—and a compelling template for any product leader scaling agentic AI and AI workflows beyond the tip of the iceberg.
Capacity planning has always been a high-stakes exercise in customer service, and when you miss, the signal shows up fast in backlogs and SLAs. I’ve lived that pressure across multiple cycles, and 2026 will reward teams that plan differently.
AI fundamentally changes capacity planning because it changes the work. It resolves the bulk of your volume, speeds up execution, and elevates the complexity and value of what humans handle. The consequence is simple: planning models must evolve.
This is the final installment in my 2026 customer service planning series, and I’m focusing on the tension every leader feels right now—be ambitious about automation, but avoid the trap of understaffing if your assumptions don’t hold.
My goal is to share how AI changes the logic of capacity planning, what I’ve learned implementing these practices with my team and with customers, and the common traps to avoid.
Traditional planning rests on relatively stable assumptions: volume grows predictably, work types stay consistent, handle times don’t swing dramatically, and productivity improves slowly with better tools and training. In an AI-first model, none of that is guaranteed, and the fundamentals flip.
The mix of work changes as AI absorbs a growing share of simpler conversations, leaving humans with deeper, more time-consuming issues that demand human-to-human connection. Demand can actually increase when you remove friction, so AI can both resolve more and attract more volume. Human time splits differently as teammates solve customer problems and also review AI behavior, give feedback, improve content, and support system-level work. Performance becomes dynamic, not fixed—automation rate isn’t a one-time number; it can rise with care and fall with neglect.
If you plan for 2026 using a pre-AI model—assuming similar productivity, similar work mix, and a linear relationship between volume and headcount—you will underestimate what it now takes to run a high-performing support organization.
There are many metrics you can track, but the one to put at the center is automation rate (AI Agent involvement rate × AI Agent resolution rate). This single construct tells me what share of total volume AI actually resolves, how much work remains for humans, how much additional demand humans can absorb, and how ambitious I can be with headcount.
Early in the journey, I prioritize raising involvement—getting the AI involved in more conversations. Once involvement is high, I shift to resolution on the hardest remaining work, where each additional 1% of automation can represent several people’s worth of capacity.
In my 2026 plans, automation rate sits alongside projected inbound volume, average “output” per person for the more complex work that remains, and occupancy—how much time is allocated to customer-facing interactions versus operational and strategic work. Together, those inputs give a realistic picture of how many people you need and where they should spend their time.
First, plan boldly on automation, but match it with investment. I do not cap automation assumptions at 40–50% “because AI is new.” Many teams are already modeling 60%, 70%, even 80%+ for 2026—when they invest in AI ownership and content. The investment is non-negotiable: named ownership for AI performance (AI ops, knowledge management, conversation design), clear automation targets by work type (e.g., informational vs. personalized vs. actions vs. deep troubleshooting), realistic expectations for what’s easy to automate and what’s not, and a concrete plan to raise automation over time in monthly or quarterly steps rather than a single jump.
To decide where to invest first, I dig into the data. I start with the biggest volume drivers, separate content-led issues from those dependent on data or complex procedures, assume higher resolution potential for content-led topics once the knowledge base is in shape, and set more modest initial resolution expectations for system-dependent flows. Then I stair-step improvements as the systems, data contracts, and workflows mature.
In short, bold automation goals only work when paired with the team structure, content, and systems required to reach them—and the discipline to iterate.
Second, expect human “output” per person to go down. That’s a mindset shift. Historically, we assumed individual productivity would stay flat or tick up as tools improved. In an AI-first model, humans handle fewer conversations but more complex, cross-functional issues—and create more value despite lower case counts.
I model a lower “cases closed per person” than prior-year baselines, explicitly assume the remaining work is more complex and time-consuming, and redefine productivity to include system-level work like AI Agent improvements, content updates, and policy or workflow change management. I also report “capacity created” from automation alongside human outputs, so leadership sees the full picture.
Third, rethink occupancy: more time off the queues, on higher-value work. Traditional occupancy splits time between inbox and training, meetings, and breaks. Now there’s an expanding “out-of-inbox” portfolio that directly affects AI performance and overall capacity: reviewing AI-handled conversations, improving AI Agent triaging and handovers, contributing to content and procedures, feeding insights to product and engineering, and supporting system changes that reduce future volume.
I set lower inbox occupancy targets than before and make the rationale explicit. People aren’t working less—they’re working differently. In planning, I assume more time spent on improvement and system work, make it visible (for example, X% in inbox and Y% on AI and system improvement), and treat this as critical, not a “nice to have.” If you don’t proactively allocate it, it won’t happen—and your automation and performance targets will suffer.
Fourth, work with the finance team early, and treat your plan as a set of assumptions. Capacity planning with AI is a set of bets across automation rate, human output, demand growth, occupancy, and where surplus capacity (if any) goes. I bring finance in early, show that the plan is dynamic and directly tied to AI performance, and label every lever as an assumption with ranges.
I commit to a quarterly review cadence with finance to compare assumptions versus reality and adjust headcount, targets, and investment as needed. The risks are real: if automation grows slower than expected and you stop backfilling too early, you’ll be understaffed for months. Hiring and onboarding take time, so course-correcting late creates strain. If you do produce surplus capacity, have a clear strategy to reallocate those teammates to higher-value work—improving systems, feeding insights back to product, supporting new channels, and driving proactive CX—rather than defaulting to reductions.
I also set explicit guardrails—if automation rate misses by five points for two consecutive months, we pause planned reductions and revisit hiring gates. If it over-performs, we shift people into backlog eradication, content upgrades, or proactive outreach, so we bank compounding value.
To set your team up for success in 2026, anchor your plan on automation rate, be honest that humans will handle fewer but harder conversations, and protect time for system improvements. Partner early and often with finance, avoid shrinking too fast, and design a plan for surplus capacity so you’re never caught flat-footed.
If AI is going to handle the majority of your customer conversations, your plan has to be designed to help it do that well and to keep your team set up for meaningful, sustainable work. A 2026 plan built on adaptable assumptions—not fixed predictions—will hold up as your work, your systems, and your customers’ expectations continue to change.
If you’d like future editions like this, subscribe and stay close—I’ll keep sharing what’s working, what isn’t, and how to tune your customer support AI strategy in real time.
In product design, AI has shifted from novelty to non-negotiable. I’ve watched teams accelerate discovery, compress prototyping cycles, and turn ambiguous ideas into validated experiences faster than ever—without sacrificing quality or customer trust.
AI in product design has quickly moved from new to necessary. Here are the AI product design tools and approaches you need to stay relevant in this decade.
From my vantage point leading product teams, “necessary” means AI is woven throughout the product lifecycle—discovery, prioritization, prototyping, validation, and iteration—not bolted on. The goal isn’t to chase hype; it’s to build durable advantage with clear AI Strategy, disciplined execution, and measurable outcomes.
First, anchor the work in strategy. Tie every AI initiative to a specific customer problem and value proposition, then express that linkage with outcomes vs output OKRs. This keeps teams focused on real impact and avoids feature-chasing. It also sharpens product positioning and clarifies where AI can deliver competitive differentiation versus simple points of parity.
Second, upgrade discovery. I rely on AI workflows to synthesize interviews, cluster themes, and surface insights at scale. A retrieval-first pipeline—grounding models in our own data—improves factuality and reduces hallucinations. Combine this with strong data governance and privacy-by-design so insights are trustworthy and compliant from day one.
Third, make quality measurable. Adopt eval-driven development: define evaluation sets and acceptance thresholds that reflect real user tasks before you ship. Pair that with A/B testing and minimum detectable effect (MDE) discipline, so you learn quickly and confidently. Add safety guardrails (red-teaming prompts, content filters, and bias checks) to manage AI risk without slowing the pace.
Fourth, enable empowered product teams. Product trios (PM, design, engineering) should co-create prompts, prototypes, and evaluation criteria. Give designers and PMs practical tools—LLMs for product managers, structured prompt templates, and reusable components—so AI-augmented work becomes the default, not a special project.
Where does AI shine in product design today? Concept exploration and market scans, turning fuzzy opportunity spaces into crisp problem statements. Rapid wireframes and interaction ideas, using gen ai for product prototyping to explore multiple design directions in minutes. UX writing that adapts tone and reduces friction across onboarding, tooltip design, and microcopy.
It also excels at guided experiences. I’ve seen strong lifts in user activation when we pair in-app guides and product tours with context-aware suggestions. For support and education use cases, a retrieval-grounded assistant can deflect tickets, shorten time-to-value, and reinforce the product’s value proposition at the exact moment a user needs help.
Voice is another frontier. A well-scoped voice AI agent can accelerate complex workflows (think data entry or multi-step configurations) when hands-free is faster or more intuitive. Just be intentional about when agentic AI adds net value versus when a simple UI tweak would do.
On the tooling side, my AI product toolbox is pragmatic and modular. For analytics and learning loops, Amplitude analytics and Pendo help quantify behavior changes and retention analysis. For in-product engagement and feedback routing, Intercom and HubSpot integrate cleanly with LLM-driven tagging and summarization. For ideation and automation, I use a ChatGPT connector and Claude Code for quick scripts, data wrangling, and prompt experiments. The constant: a retrieval-first pipeline that grounds models in approved knowledge and maintains context window management at scale.
Risk management is built in, not bolted on. Set clear AI risk management policies, catalog model and data dependencies, and document decisions. Align with regulatory compliance requirements early, and keep an audit trail of prompts, datasets, and eval results. That’s how you move fast without breaking trust.
If you’re getting started, begin small: pick one high-friction workflow, add a retrieval-grounded copilot, and measure the lift. Use the results to inform product roadmapping and sprint planning, then scale to adjacent use cases. With disciplined discovery, sharp evaluation, and the right tooling, AI becomes a force multiplier for product teams and a clear win for customers.
I’m constantly asked by SMB owners: What if your small business could have a full marketing team—automated content calendars, customer segmentation, and channel-specific posts—without the headcount? That question is no longer hypothetical; it’s precisely the promise behind Mowie, and the way they got there is a masterclass in practical AI product development.
I recently listened to Chris O'Connor (CEO) and Jessica Valenzuela (Co-Founder) of Mowie, an AI marketing platform built for small and medium-sized businesses in restaurants, retail, and e-commerce. Their story starts with a concierge marketing service—doing the work by hand for overwhelmed owners—and evolves into a fully automated AI product.
They walk through their "document hierarchy" approach: how Mowie crawls the web to build a "dossier" about each business, infers customer segments and marketing pillars, and generates quarterly content calendars with channel-specific posts. As a product leader, this is the kind of retrieval-first pipeline that consistently outperforms naive prompt chaining because it builds durable context before generation.
They also unpack the technical challenges of structuring unstructured data and the evolution from rigid schemas to loosely structured markdown. In my experience with LLMs for product managers, markdown becomes a flexible intermediate representation that’s easy to diff, trace, and feed back into models without brittle parsing.
Equally important, they use customer feedback—from calendar approvals to regeneration requests—as their primary evaluation signal. That’s eval-driven development in practice: close the loop with lightweight evals that reflect genuine user intent, not proxy metrics.
The planning model is elegant: the three mini-calendars—public events, business-specific events, and recommended campaigns—roll up into a coherent plan that eliminates the blank-page problem and enables steady, predictable execution.
Crucially, they’re building traceability so customers can see which context documents influenced their content. This kind of transparency increases trust, accelerates edits, and supports governance in regulated categories where auditability matters.
Onboarding and data collection stay pragmatic: let the system crawl first, ask humans only for deltas, and progressively profile over time. It’s a pattern I advocate in continuous discovery and AI workflows—keep humans in the loop without overwhelming them, and make the right action the easy action.
Early on, they used Simon Sinek's Golden Circle framework to validate demand and sharpen messaging. Framing the "why" before the "what" helps teams maintain a crisp value proposition and tighten their go-to-market strategy.
Performance measurement goes beyond vanity metrics by connecting marketing performance back to point-of-sale data for attribution. The ability to tie campaigns to revenue events is the bridge from clever content to accountable outcomes.
What’s next is equally compelling: deeper attribution, omnichannel expansion, and digital out-of-home displays. For SMBs, that points to a unified analytics platform spanning email, social, and in-store touchpoints—exactly where modern marketing is headed.
My takeaways for builders: invest in a retrieval-first pipeline with a resilient document hierarchy; prefer loosely structured markdown over rigid JSON when dealing with messy inputs; design human-in-the-loop controls that double as evals; and always connect activity to business outcomes. That’s how you turn an idea into a repeatable system that scales.
If you want to explore further, start here: Mowie AI — AI marketing platform for SMBs. For early validation and storytelling, revisit Simon Sinek's Golden Circle.
I’ve spent countless cycles guiding teams through the maze of dashboards, SQL pulls, and ad‑hoc analyses—only to watch truly meaningful patterns emerge far too late. Automated insights are the next frontier in product analytics: a shift from manual exploration to AI that proactively surfaces what matters most. When we let the system do the heavy lifting, we accelerate discovery, reduce bias, and give product trios the clarity to act.
Finding causal connections in product data involves exhaustive searches and tests. We trained our AI to find “aha” moments in minutes instead of weeks.
Here’s what that means in practice for product management: the platform continuously scans events, cohorts, and segments; prioritizes signals linked to activation, conversion, and retention; and highlights likely causes behind meaningful movements in your core KPIs. Instead of sifting through endless funnels and cohorts, I get ranked hypotheses I can validate with targeted A/B testing and minimum detectable effect (MDE) guardrails.
This approach turns analytics into action. Automated insights reduce time-to-learning, tighten our discovery loops, and make continuous discovery tangible—especially when we’re aligning roadmaps, designing experiments, and refining onboarding. Whether you’re using tools like Amplitude analytics or instrumenting a unified analytics platform, the value is the same: faster, clearer paths to customer impact.
I’ve seen teams unlock retention analysis breakthroughs by spotting counterintuitive patterns—like a specific feature combination or an overlooked step in onboarding—well before they would have surfaced through manual analysis. With AI workflows scanning the noise and elevating the signal, we can focus on decisions: ship or iterate, scale or sunset, double down or pivot. That’s empowered product teams in action.
If you’re building for product-led growth, this is the leverage you’ve been waiting for. Automated insights transform how we prioritize, test, and communicate strategy—bringing us from gut feel and lagging indicators to explainable, causal narratives we can stand behind. The outcome is simple: more confident bets, less waste, and a faster path to durable product-market fit.
Inspired by this post on Amplitude – Best Practices.
My writing process used to be messy. Even in my role leading product strategy, I’d start strong and then stall because I hadn’t clarified what I truly wanted to say.
I’d begin with a brain dump—everything swirling in my head. I’d try to shape it into an outline, lose patience, and just start writing. A few paragraphs later, I’d realize I didn’t know where I was going, stop, and return to the outline. It was a tortured loop between writing and structuring.
Now I do it differently. When I get stuck, I don’t start writing. I ask Claude for help.
Claude reviews my outline and helps me fill in gaps. It often suggests things that I don’t like. This is good. It helps me figure out the core of what I want to say. Instead of writing my way to what I think, I discuss my way to what I think.
Claude isn’t just a sounding board. I also use it to help me brainstorm headlines, explore outline alternatives, critique each section as I write, conduct supporting research, act as my thesaurus and dictionary, make SEO recommendations, and so much more. As a result, I am writing way more.
I didn’t design this workflow in one sitting. I built it iteratively, the same way I build products: by asking, "How can Claude help with this?" and evolving from there.
If you haven’t been following along, I’m deep in a series about Claude Code and how it helps me work better. Here’s what we’ve covered so far: Claude Code: What It Is, How It’s Different, and Why Non-Technical People Should Use It, Stop Repeating Yourself: Give Claude Code a Memory, How to Use Claude Code Safely: A Non-Technical Guide to Managing Risk, and How to Choose Which Tasks to Automate with AI (+50 Real Examples).
This week, I’m diving into how to design personal AI workflows. I’ll use my writing workflow to illustrate each step, and I encourage you to follow along with your own process so you end with something tangible.
Claude breaks down an AI workflow article and suggests three paywall points, weighing trade-offs to guide conversion strategy. A clear, structured example of planning content and automation steps with Claude Code.
Designing AI workflows looks a lot like designing product solutions. I lean on "discovery" habits—clarifying outcomes, mapping the journey, and testing assumptions—to make the work both reliable and repeatable.
This series is inspired by my personal usage of Claude Code. I have not received any compensation from Anthropic for writing this series. And you can trust that if that ever changes, I will disclose it. This is not only required by the FTC here in the US, but I strongly believe it is the right thing to do. You can count on me to do so.
First, I map out what I do to complete the task. Once you’ve identified the AI workflow you want to create, start by mapping exactly what you do when you do it yourself. If this feels hard, do the task a few more times and jot down each step as you go.
Here’s what I do when I write a blog post: I choose a topic; I write down everything I can think of related to that topic; I structure it into an outline; I do some research to fill in gaps; I write each section; I edit each section; I think about SEO tactics; I brainstorm headlines; I decide what images to add; and I send it to my editor.
If this looks a lot like story mapping, that’s because it is. Instead of mapping what a customer has to do to get value from a solution, I’m mapping what I do to complete a task. The benefit is the same: I can see what must happen and ask, "Where can AI help?"
From here, I focus on four moves: choose one step to automate or augment with AI; decide on the right automation (or augmentation) strategy—code vs. LLMs; prototype the first workflow with detailed instructions; and test and iterate until it meets my bar for quality and speed.
My goal is to give you enough guidance that you can follow along and end with a draft of your first AI workflow. If you apply continuous discovery to your own process, you’ll not only accelerate output—you’ll improve the clarity and quality of your thinking along the way.
I’ve spent the last few years weaving AI into core product workflows, and the pattern is clear: when we pair disciplined product thinking with pragmatic AI Strategy, growth compounds. The question I hear most isn’t if AI can help, but where to begin and how to de-risk the journey while moving fast.
AI for business growth starts with one of these six strategies. See how companies use AI to unlock revenue, cut costs, and scale smarter and faster.
1) Revenue acceleration with unified customer intelligence. I start by connecting behavioral analytics and CRM integration to a unified analytics platform, then layer a retrieval-first pipeline so large language models can surface high-intent accounts, churn signals, and next-best actions. With Amplitude analytics and A/B testing, we validate AI-driven playbooks for upsell, cross-sell, and win-back—turning insights into measurable lift rather than novelty.
2) Cost reduction through targeted automation. Not all automation yields the same outcome. I look for repetitive, high-volume processes where quality is easy to verify—customer support ai strategy with AI-assisted deflection, accounts payable automation, and security workflows like threat detection and response. Combining agentic AI with clear guardrails reduces handle time, frees teams for higher-value work, and keeps error rates within acceptable thresholds.
3) Faster time-to-market via eval-driven development. Speed without signal is noise. I lean on eval-driven development to instrument models, measure drift, and tighten CI/CD loops. We track DORA metrics like deployment frequency while using gen ai for product prototyping to compress discovery and delivery. Frameworks and tools such as Claude Code help engineers iterate safely behind feature flags so we can ship learning, not just code.
4) Personalization that drives activation and retention. Growth sticks when onboarding is contextual. I use in-app guides, product tours, and thoughtful tooltip design powered by LLMs for product managers to tailor the first-run experience. With retention analysis and outcomes vs output OKRs, we align personalization with the moments that matter—activation, habit formation, and expansion.
5) Trust-by-design to scale responsibly. AI risk management, privacy-by-design, and data governance are not afterthoughts; they are growth enablers. By defining policy, red-teaming prompts, and practicing context window management, we reduce rework, limit incident management, and maintain compliance across markets. Clear review gates make it easier to say yes to more AI use cases without compromising customer trust.
6) Voice and agent experiences that feel like product, not add-ons. When prompt engineering for voice and voice AI agent patterns are integrated into the core journey—guided onboarding, smart handoffs, proactive notifications—engagement rises. Agent Analytics turns conversations into product signals we can act on in roadmapping and sprint planning, closing the loop between user intent and product improvement.
My playbook for getting started is simple: pick one revenue and one efficiency use case, define success upfront, and ship a narrowly scoped MVP with robust analytics. Use continuous discovery with product trios to refine prompts, data sources, and experience design. Then scale what works, retire what doesn’t, and let evidence—not hype—set the roadmap.
If you’re evaluating where to apply gen ai next, these six lanes offer fast paths to impact without sacrificing governance or customer trust. The companies I’ve seen win treat AI as a capability within the product, not a separate project—and they measure it with the same rigor they use for any critical feature.
Support teams in Spain just got the clearest signal yet that the old way of doing things won’t cut it anymore. As I look at the details, I see more than a regulatory hurdle—I see a blueprint for the modernization many of us have been pushing toward for years.
The signal arrives in the form of one of the most ambitious customer service regulations in Europe—a law designed to strengthen consumer protections and set clear expectations for fair, transparent, and personalized customer service. Among its measures: new protections against spam calls, stronger transparency requirements, safeguards around personalized interactions, and measurable standards for speed, accessibility, and complaint handling within customer support.
It’s a significant shift, especially for large enterprises and essential-service providers. While the initial reaction might be anxiety about audits and penalties, the larger opportunity is hard to ignore: this law compels us to build modern, resilient support operations that scale, perform, and earn trust.
Spain is often an early mover in consumer-protection regulation, and this shift could signal what future standards across the EU might look like. For EMEA leaders, this is a moment to reevaluate operating models, invest in automation thoughtfully, and ensure customer experience improvements directly support regulatory compliance.
Below, I break down what the law requires, what it means in practice, and how AI Agents like Fin can help teams meet regulatory expectations while delivering faster, more personal support at scale.
The law applies in full to providers of regulated services, including water, energy, passenger transport, postal services, pay-audiovisual media, and electronic communications, and also to any company (or group) that meets certain size and turnover thresholds, even if their core business falls outside those sectors.
Large companies (those with more than 250 employees and over €50 million in turnover) also hold additional obligations, particularly around multilingual support in Spain’s co-official language regions.
While the law is still moving through its final approval stages, the direction is clear: a broad set of obligations will apply to reinforce consumer rights, ensuring they can: Reach support quickly. Speak to a human when needed. Get clear information during outages or service disruptions. Have complaints handled promptly and on time.
1. 95% of support calls must be answered within three minutes
This raises the bar significantly for responsiveness, especially during spikes, outages, billing cycles, or seasonal surges. Most support systems are not built for this level of agility. In my experience, you can’t hire your way to this metric sustainably—you have to design for it.
2. Customers must be able to speak to a human on request
Automation is allowed, but it cannot be the only option. At any point during a call, a customer must be able to transfer to a human if they ask for one. Companies cannot trap customers in automated loops. The practical implication: every workflow needs a reliable, audited escape hatch to a person.
3. Support lines must be free of charge
Premium-rate numbers are prohibited. Customer service cannot generate revenue for the business, nor may it be used to upsell products. This cleanly separates service from sales and reduces consumer friction.
4. Essential services must offer 24/7 support for continuity issues
Electricity, water, gas, telecoms, and transport providers must always be reachable at all hours when customers need to report service interruptions. That means coverage, triage, and routing must be always-on.
5. Complaints must be resolved within 15 days – or within five days for undue charges
This halves the previous general complaint window of 30 days and adds a much faster path for billing-error complaints. Companies must maintain records, assign tracking numbers, and ensure timely follow-up. Your case management discipline will make or break this requirement.
6. No spam calls or unwanted commercial pressure
Companies must identify business calls with a designated prefix, and customer -service calls with a different one. Telecom operators will be required to block calls that do not use these codes. Additionally, contracts obtained via unsolicited calls will be legally null and void, protecting consumers from being pressured into commitments they never intended to make.
7. Companies must maintain a unified complaint-tracking system
All complaints, claims, and incidents must be recorded in a centralized system to ensure traceability. If your data is fragmented across tools, this is a call to centralize and standardize intake.
8. Companies must pass annual external audits
These audits assess whether customer service processes are meeting the required standards. In practice, that means consistent processes, measurable outcomes, and reliable evidence.
9. Better linguistic and accessibility rights
Large companies operating in regions with co-official languages must be able to provide support in those languages. They must also ensure their customer service is accessible for vulnerable consumers, such as those with disabilities or older adults. Multilingual and accessible by design is the new default.
10. Fairer contract renewals
Companies must provide customers with 15 days’ notice prior to automatic renewal of online subscriptions and make cancellation simple. This is both a compliance and customer trust win.
Most support systems weren’t built for this level of speed or operational rigor. But the steps required to comply are the same ones that make service better for customers—and better for the teams delivering it. That’s why I view AI as an essential capability, not a bolt-on.
With the regulatory expectations clear, the question becomes: what does a modern, compliant support operation look like? For me, it blends human empathy with intelligent automation, proving auditability without sacrificing experience.
This is where AI plays a meaningful role. Not as a replacement for humans, but as a reliable front line that can handle a wide range of queries, including the most complex ones that require real depth, while keeping queues under control.
Adopting an AI Agent like Fin helps teams build a support model that meets regulatory expectations and improves customer experience across all your channels. Here’s how.
Many organizations will struggle to meet the three-minute standard during normal times, let alone during spikes or busy seasons, without unsustainably scaling their teams. Fin can help by reducing the number of calls that reach your phone lines and Fin Voice will ensure the ones that do are handled quickly.
Reducing avoidable call volume before it reaches the queue
Many of the queries teams receive are predictable: outage updates, billing questions, account changes, and other repeatable issues. Fin can resolve these instantly across several channels, including live chat, SMS, email, and WhatsApp, using the content and processes your team already maintains. I’ve seen this alone cut peak-time pressure dramatically.
Answering the phone immediately
For customers who do call, Fin Voice can pick up straight away. It provides natural, conversational responses based on your existing knowledge and helps your team stay responsive during busy periods.
Making it easy to reach a human easier during spikes
When queues build up, Fin can capture the reason for the call, gather details, and prioritize the most urgent issues. If you offer callback options, Fin can help schedule them quickly so customers avoid long wait times, which is key for staying compliant during peak periods.
The law requires customers to reach a real person whenever they request one. Fin supports this by keeping the path to a human clear and dependable: every interaction includes an option to speak to a person, and that option is accessible until the issue is resolved; when chosen, Fin hands over full context so human teams don’t start from scratch; if you show team availability or wait times, Fin can surface that information for customers; escalations can be prioritized to ensure faster pickup; alerts can notify on-call staff when urgent issues arise. On the phone, Fin Voice follows the same principle. Callers can request a transfer at any moment, and Fin routes the call to the right team with context intact.
Essential-service providers must be reachable at any hour when customers need to report service interruptions. Fin can help you meet this requirement without building a full overnight staffing model.
Always-on answers and triage
Fin provides first-line support at any hour of the day or night. Fin Voice brings this capability to the phone, giving callers immediate help even when your human team is offline. Fin can also direct customers to the latest updates you’ve published, such as outage information or status pages.
Routing urgent issues to the right people
When an issue requires human judgment, Fin gathers the necessary details and routes it to the appropriate on-call team using your existing after-hours processes. Teams can set up notifications so urgent issues are seen quickly.
Proactively surface what matters most
With AI Insights, Fin can also monitor for emerging patterns in customer conversations through Trending Topics. This means that if there’s a sudden spike in reports about a specific outage or a recurring question about a new process, Fin can flag these trends in real time. Your team is alerted to what’s top-of-mind for customers, so you can prioritize updates, publish targeted FAQs, or escalate critical issues, ensuring your support stays relevant and responsive, even overnight.
Complaints and outages often create the biggest spikes in volume, and the new law increases pressure to respond quickly, keep customers informed, and maintain complete records. This is exactly where structured AI intake adds value.
A more structured complaint intake
Fin can recognize when a customer is lodging a complaint, gather required information, and initiate a record in your existing system with a clear ID assigned from the outset.
Clear ownership and deadline alignment
Your team can then use your case-management tools to apply the 15-day resolution timeline (or five says for undue charges). Fin’s structured intake helps ensure that ownership and next steps are visible, rather than buried in unstructured notes.
Faster, more consistent outage communications
During service interruptions, Fin can share the latest published information, provide estimated fix times when available, and direct customers to live updates. On the phone, Fin Voice can triage incident-related calls quickly so callers aren’t waiting for a human agent just to receive basic information.
While multilingual support is only mandatory for large companies operating in co-official language regions, it remains essential for meeting consumer expectations. Fin helps by supporting multilingual, natural language interactions across voice and other channels; operating within channels that support accessibility features, like channels compatible with screen readers or commonly used messaging apps; and offering “request a call” paths and collecting the necessary information up front so teams can follow up quickly for customers who prefer phone support.
The law prohibits customer service interactions from generating additional revenue or being used to offer new products. With Guidance, you can set Fin up to stay firmly within these boundaries by shaping how it responds, which topics it should avoid, and what it should prioritize when a customer is seeking help or lodging a complaint.
The law raises expectations around documentation and audit readiness. Fin helps by making customer interactions more structured and consistent: when a conversation involves a complaint, Fin can ensure the required information is captured and a clear ID assigned; that ID can follow the interaction so it remains easy to trace; consistent intake gives you better visibility into key metrics regulators care about, like response times, time to first human contact, escalation volume, and whether complaints are resolved within required timelines; transcripts, summaries, and metadata can be retained until cases are resolved, supporting audit requirements; many organizations maintain internal compliance playbooks outlining processes and owners. Fin’s structured intake helps keep these practices reliable; leverage Insights to identify trending topics, optimize processes and measure service quality.
Spain’s new customer service law raises the bar on speed, access, and accountability. It’s natural to worry about how your team will cope, especially if your support operation has grown organically across tools and regions. I’ve seen how quickly burnout and chaos can set in when expectations rise faster than capacity.
The reality is that meeting these expectations through people alone would put unsustainable pressure on already stretched support teams. The risk of burnout and operational chaos is real, which is why an AI Agent like Fin can bring welcome relief.
By handling everything from high-volume, repetitive questions to many of the deeper, more involved issues customers raise, Fin keeps queues manageable and prevents the strain from falling entirely on your human team, helping everyone stay above water as expectations rise.
For companies operating across the EU, adapting early to Spain’s stricter expectations can build resilience for whatever comes next—whether that ends up being driven by regulation or customer demand. Now is the time to align compliance, AI strategy, and customer experience into a single, measurable operating model.
I build products on the belief that trust is earned in every design decision and every deployment. Trust has always been a first principle at Intercom, from our early investments in security and privacy to the globally recognized certifications that shape our approach today.
As AI becomes more deeply embedded in customer-facing work, it’s essential that businesses can rely on systems that are safe, reliable, and governed to the highest standards. That’s why we’re proud to share that Intercom is now AIUC-1 certified, becoming one of the first companies to meet the world’s first standard designed specifically for AI Agents. For leaders navigating AI Strategy and AI risk management, this is more than a badge—it’s a measurable leap forward in governance and operational rigor.
AIUC-1 is the first certification tailored to the unique risks and challenges of AI Agents. It complements broader AI governance frameworks like ISO 42001 by focusing on enterprise-specific concerns like security, customer safety, system reliability, data and privacy, society, and accountability. In practice, this alignment helps us translate policy into deployable safeguards across cybersecurity, data governance, and regulatory compliance.
To achieve certification, organizations undergo independent third-party audits and quarterly adversarial testing across more than a thousand enterprise risk scenarios. This continuous technical evaluation ensures that AI systems remain robust against fast-evolving threats and that safeguards keep pace with rapid progress in the field. As a product leader, I welcome this level of scrutiny—it’s how we operationalize threat detection and response and make agentic AI dependable at scale.
AIUC-1 itself evolves every quarter, incorporating new research, threat patterns, and global best practices. The standard is shaped by the AIUC-1 Consortium, launched in November with more than 50 founding members who collectively handle tens of trillions of dollars in payments and serve over a billion people daily. Intercom is proud not only to be certified, but to be recognized as a founding technical contributor helping shape the development of the standard. That continuous, community-driven iteration mirrors how we build—measure, learn, and harden—so our customers benefit from real-world, enterprise-ready AI.
Intercom has decades of combined experience in security, compliance, and trust, and we’ve consistently demonstrated that robust governance and fast innovation can coexist. Achieving AIUC-1 certification reinforces that the same rigor we apply across our platform also extends to Fin, our AI Agent. I’ve seen first-hand how risk and procurement teams evaluate generative AI: they expect clarity, evidence, and controls. This certification delivers independent proof that our approach meets those expectations.
For our customers, this certification provides independent validation that Intercom’s AI systems are safe, resilient, and enterprise-ready. It confirms that our AI is tested regularly, built with strong safeguards, and aligned with the expectations of modern security and risk teams. It also signals our continued leadership in shaping responsible AI practices globally, ensuring our customers benefit from standards built for real-world use. In short, you can move faster with confidence—without compromising on governance.
Intercom has always approached trust as an ongoing commitment. AIUC-1 strengthens the foundation we’ve built across other frameworks and certifications, including SOC 2, ISO 27001, ISO 27701, ISO 27018, HIPAA, HDS, and ISO 42001. Together, these certifications create a comprehensive control fabric across privacy, security, and reliability—critical pillars for any enterprise deploying gen AI into production workflows.
As AI technology accelerates, we will continue to evolve our safeguards, deepen our governance practices, and contribute to the standards that shape responsible AI. Our promise is simple: to build AI that is not only powerful and efficient, but safe, transparent, and deserving of the trust our customers place in us. That’s how we turn innovation into durable value.
You can learn more about our certifications and access our security and compliance documentation through the Intercom Trust Center.
Get started with Fin and see how an AIUC-1 certified, enterprise-ready AI Agent can elevate your customer experience with confidence.
Vibe marketing can electrify a brand, but it can also derail a strategy if it outruns the fundamentals. I have seen campaigns with breathtaking creative fall flat because the message had no anchor in product truth, no measurable goals, and no operational guardrails. In this installment, I share the patterns I watch for, the diagnostics I run, and the AI tools I use to keep the vibe aligned with outcomes.
Learn how to avoid the five most common mistakes in vibe marketing to have more success with AI marketing tools.
At its best, vibe marketing translates product positioning and value proposition into an emotional signal customers immediately recognize. At its worst, it becomes mood without meaning. The difference is disciplined product management: clear go-to-market strategy, outcomes vs output OKRs, rigorous A/B testing, and a feedback loop that connects creative choices to customer behavior.
Mistake 1: Mistaking mood for strategy. Early drafts often lean on catchy lines or trending aesthetics that don’t map to customer jobs-to-be-done or competitive differentiation. When I feel that drift, I force the team to articulate the core product promise, restate the positioning, and tie each headline to a measurable outcome. If a message cannot be traced to a specific hypothesis, audience, and metric, we rewrite it before it ships.
Mistake 2: Chasing trends instead of customer truth. Vibes built on whatever is viral this week rarely compounding learnings. I push for continuous discovery with interviews, in-product surveys, and sentiment analysis, then let gen ai generate multiple narrative variants grounded in actual quotes and objections. We evaluate with A/B testing and an explicit minimum detectable effect so we don’t declare victory on noise. That keeps our experimentation eval-driven, not anecdote-driven.
Mistake 3: Measuring vanity, not meaning. Reach and likes can be directional, but I optimize for activation, time-to-value, retention analysis, and conversion lift across the funnel. I instrument journeys in a unified analytics platform with Amplitude analytics and CRM integration so we can connect vibe exposure to outcomes. If the creative lifts click-through but hurts downstream activation, it’s not working—no matter how cool it looks.
Mistake 4: One vibe for every segment and channel. Audiences experience value differently, so the same creative rarely works in ads, landing pages, and in-app guides. I use LLMs for product managers and CustomGPT workflows to adapt the message by segment and stage, then validate with product tours, in-app prompts, and targeted lifecycle emails. The goal is coherence, not uniformity: a consistent story tuned to the context where decisions happen.
Mistake 5: Unbounded AI experimentation. Without AI risk management and data governance, teams can unintentionally ship off-brand or non-compliant copy. I set privacy-by-design standards, define approval thresholds, and establish context window management so models stay on-brief and on-policy. We log generations, review outputs against brand guidelines, and use retrieval to ground messaging in approved claims.
My practical playbook is simple: define the hypothesis tied to positioning, generate creative options with gen ai, pre-qualify with qualitative feedback, run A/B tests with clear success criteria, and iterate only on variants that move a business metric. Product trios align weekly on learnings so marketing signals and product-led growth motions reinforce each other. When the vibe matches the value and the data, momentum compounds.
Vibe marketing is not the opposite of rigor; it is rigor expressed emotionally. With the right AI strategy, measurement discipline, and governance, the creative spark becomes a durable advantage—and your brand earns the right to keep the spotlight.
Inspired by this post on Amplitude – Perspectives.
