# Taking AI to Work: Company Casebook This companion is a quick reference to J&M Hotels & Events, the fictional organization used throughout Taking AI to Work. Use it to orient a workshop group, check a recurring fact, or see how a record travels between functions. The chapter packets contain the complete inputs for their exercises. A later exercise or test variation does not silently replace an earlier packet. J&M, its people, customers, locations, records, procedures, and figures are invented teaching material. No example describes an actual deployment, employee assessment, customer commitment, or measured business outcome. The setting provides continuity while the practical methods can be adapted to other organizations. ## The organization J&M operates six hotels and two standalone event venues, with restaurant and catering services. Its workforce is approximately 1,200, including year-round and seasonal employees. The three markets below are fictional settings in the United States; no real state's legal requirements are assigned to them. | Market | Property | Code | | --- | --- | --- | | Bellport | J&M Bellport Hotel | BH | | Bellport | J&M Bellport Airport Hotel | BA | | Bellport | J&M Bellport Events | BE | | Lakehaven | J&M Lakehaven Hotel | LH | | Lakehaven | J&M Lakehaven Conference Hotel | LC | | Lakehaven | J&M Lakehaven Events | LE | | Westford | J&M Westford Hotel | WH | | Westford | J&M Westford Station Hotel | WS | Hotels also have meeting space. A hotel meeting-service pilot is therefore possible without placing it at one of the standalone venues. A property code is an identity check, not decoration. Evidence for LC's display does not establish the condition of equipment at BE. ## The people who recur | Colleague | Responsibility in the examples | | --- | --- | | Lena Ortiz, chief operating officer | Cross-functional priorities and authorized operating decisions | | Priya Shah, Finance director | Financial analysis review and defined commercial or metric decisions | | Marcus Reed, HR director | Employee process ownership and qualified employment review | | Tessa Cole, L&D lead | Learning design and release after subject-owner review | | Sam Patel, group sales manager | Discovery, proposals, customer-change verification, and handoff | | Nina Brooks, Bellport Events manager | Bellport Events operations, local procedures, and readiness review | | Owen Chen, legal counsel | Legal interpretation and approved guidance | | Rosa Vega, Procurement manager | Supplier preparation, comparisons, and purchasing process | | Theo Bennett, IT service lead | Support systems, access workflows, and technical implementation | | Amara Lewis, security and risk lead | Security escalation, evidence review, and permission questions | | Erin Walsh, Marketing and Communications lead | Offer and communication review | | Ben Torres, Guest Services lead | Customer wording and service escalation | | Mei Park, Analytics lead | Analysis, definitions, and reproducibility | | Cal Morgan, Facilities lead | Qualified technical review and facilities scope | The role table does not grant universal authority. Each case supplies the decision boundary for its task. Nina manages Bellport Events; she is not implicitly the manager of every hotel and venue. Use a property role when another location needs an operational decision. ## The recurring event: BE-204 The Harbor Association annual planning forum is scheduled for November 12, 2026 at Bellport Events. EVT-ORDER-BE204 v3, approved October 28, supplies the plan used in the examples: 120 attendees, six breakout groups of 20, Cedar as the main room, and Maple and Birch each used for three sequential sessions. The October 27 signed commercial baseline has a supplied subtotal of 15,000 dollars. Venue is 6,000, catering is 7,200, and audiovisual service is 1,800. Taxes, service charges, and optional items are excluded. These figures are not a complete invoice or a statement of recognized revenue. The teaching direct-cost calculation is 7,200 dollars: catering ingredients 3,600, event labor 2,400, audiovisual rental 900, and supplies 300. The resulting contribution before overhead and excluded charges is 7,800. Finance scenarios explicitly state any changed assumptions; a scenario does not amend the signed baseline. | Date | Record or event | State to preserve | | --- | --- | --- | | October 27 | Signed commercial baseline | Supplied subtotal and exclusions established for the exercise | | October 28 | EVT-ORDER-BE204 v3 approved | Six-group operating baseline | | October 30 | Customer requests seven groups | Request exists; no automatic approval, fee, or layout change | | November 5 | CLIENT-BE204-1105-v1 | Clarification remains open in this snapshot; Nina needs the intended structure | | November 9 | K-204 kitchen acknowledgment | Planning count 120 acknowledged; service not proved complete | | November 10 | READY-BE204-1110-v1 | Seven-group signage draft conflicts; delivery and inspection evidence pending | | November 11 | Scheduled audiovisual delivery and setup inspection | Scheduled activities only in the November 10 packet | | November 12 | Scheduled event date | The book does not supply an actual event-completion report | The cross-functional chapter uses the November 10 state. It does not solve the discrepancy by inventing a customer approval or an inspection. A workshop may introduce a clearly labeled new test record, but should keep that variation separate from this reference. ## A different event: BE-219 BE-219 is the Northline Network's tentative November 18 event for 80 people at Bellport Events. Its planning packet describes a 9 a.m.–4 p.m. event, ten tables of eight, two breakouts of 40, and lunch. Venue 5,400, catering 4,800, and audiovisual 1,800 produce a planning subtotal of 12,000 before excluded items. Availability, terms, and approval remain unresolved. A 90-person pricing test changes a scenario subtotal to 12,600; it does not change the canonical 80-person inquiry. A floor-plan update intended for November 2 has no supplied sending evidence in the November 4 follow-up packet. Keep intended, sent, received, and approved states distinct. A BE-219 checklist cannot prove a BE-204 inspection. This wrong-event variation appears in evaluation because similar-looking records can be easy to accept without checking identity. ## Finance examples that must stay separate September's Bellport Events monthly fixture is FIN-SEP26-BE-v1. It is a fictional management-reporting extract on a consistent comparison basis. | Line | Budget, USD | Actual, USD | | --- | ---: | ---: | | Event revenue | 180000 | 171000 | | Catering ingredients | 42000 | 44100 | | Event labor | 54000 | 59400 | | Other direct event costs | 18000 | 18000 | | Contribution before overhead | 66000 | 49500 | Contribution is 16,500 below budget. The numbers do not establish why revenue or costs changed. Explanations require transaction or operational evidence. The November forecast packet has a confirmed remainder of 68,000 that explicitly excludes BE-191, BE-204, and BE-219. Add confirmed BE-191 at 9,000 and BE-204 at 15,000 for a confirmed-only planning baseline of 92,000. Adding tentative BE-219 at 12,000 gives a separate 104,000 scenario. A duplicate pipeline copy of BE-204 must not be counted again. No probability or recognized-revenue conclusion is supplied. INV-317 is a separate September registration-stand transaction. Ten units were invoiced at 90 dollars, while the supplied receiving record confirms eight. The two-unit mismatch corresponds to 180 dollars of invoiced goods, but it does not authorize a partial payment or prove that the other units never arrived. ## One occupancy snapshot, two tasks EXE-02 and DAT-02 use OCC-BH-1026-v1, the same Bellport Hotel October snapshot. Report O uses available room-nights after removing 50 out-of-service room-nights from 1,050 physical room-nights. Report F retains the physical room-night denominator. Both use 820 sold room-nights, producing 82.0% and 78.1% respectively. EXE-02 prepares the management reconciliation and identifies the decision needed before choosing a headline. DAT-02 continues that work by drafting a reproducible metric definition, with candidate O still awaiting approval. Mei coordinates the reconciliation and definition; Priya owns the management-reporting meaning, with the property Operations owner supplying the operating basis. Neither exercise approves a metric merely by calculating it. ## The meeting-service pilot develops over time MEET-PILOT-01 v1 concerns Bellport Hotel, not BE-204. The exploratory offer is for 12–20 people, a two-hour meeting room, and standard presentation equipment, with catering separately quoted. Early price and response-time promises are unapproved. | Stage | Supplied state | | --- | --- | | October 30 options | Option A one property/four weeks, 3,000 dollars/28 hours estimated initial preparation; B two properties 4,800/54 hours; C scope-only 1,000/8 hours | | November 2 decision | Lena authorizes Option A feasibility planning only, not pilot launch or spending | | November 6 follow-through | Required completion evidence remains insufficient in the supplied packet | | November 7 pilot-design brief | Eight meetings and measurement criteria proposed, still awaiting later authorization | | November 13 DEC-PILOT-1113-v1 | A later fictional record authorizes the limited eight-meeting pilot for November 16–December 11 | | December 14 results packet | Authored results are reviewed against the later pilot criteria | The results contain 540 minutes of per-meeting preparation against a 480-minute aggregate criterion, seven favorable usefulness ratings, and one unresolved setup issue. Expansion is held in the worked result because effort and issue criteria fail. The original 28-hour initial design/setup estimate measures different work; do not compare it directly with per-meeting preparation. DAT-05's eight-task AI preparation trial is a separate invented dataset. Its 255 manual minutes versus 241 assisted minutes include all eight tasks. Six assisted outputs are accepted and two rejected, so the zero-critical-error requirement fails. Neither dataset is evidence of actual AI savings or a real service pilot. ## The supplier and equipment records ClearSound Rentals is supplier S-14. Agreement A-14 covers audiovisual rental at Bellport Events through December 31, 2026, with return of listed items by January 4, 2027 at 5 p.m. Bellport local time. Its referenced Schedule A is missing from the supplied contract packet. Do not infer the complete item list or authorize continued use. A-14-R1 is an unaccepted October 29 renewal proposal for 2027 with an automatic-renewal provision. That proposed term does not amend the current agreement. A possible January 2 equipment need is unapproved in the November 6 renewal-dependency packet. Lakehaven Conference Hotel's installed display is a different fixture. On October 23, a portable unit has a recorded functional check, but that does not diagnose the installed unit or establish suitability for the customer's presentation. The later facilities intake retains an unverified installed-asset label and no confirmed cause. No repair or return-to-service decision is supplied. Bellport Hotel laundry equipment L3 appears in a separate equipment-pattern exercise. Four documents concern three underlying runs, including two interruption reports. The repeated R10 intake must not become a second failure. The code E7 has no supplied diagnostic meaning, and the extract has no total-run denominator. ## Procedures and source relationships GOV-AI-01 v1 provides the fictional operating premise: organization-approved environments, suitable data and connector permissions, and no assumption that source access permits disclosure to every audience. EVT-HANDOFF-02 v2, effective September 14, requires staff to compare the setup sheet with the latest approved event order, preserve versions and discrepancies, and route the issue to the event manager. It does not permit a promise or equipment move while a discrepancy remains unresolved. Immediate safety concerns follow the established immediate process. BH-GUEST-FAQ v3, approved October 20 and effective October 25, states check-in at 3 p.m. and checkout at 11 a.m. The earlier noon-checkout version is retired. Early access and luggage storage require front-desk review. A generic FAQ does not guarantee an individual guest's request or verify a booking-support destination. IT-ACCESS-01 v1 separates a complete request, manager approval, system-owner approval, and actual provisioning. A prompt cannot supply any of those approvals. The IT chapter also distinguishes a drafted ticket from a created ticket and a timed-out write from a confirmed failure. When a record changes, retain the prior version with its date and status. The reusable skill should point to the current authoritative procedure; copied summaries should identify their sources. Test variations belong in a test set, with their expected behavior, so they do not become accidental company history. ## Find the cases The following index uses the manuscript's stable case IDs. Every functional chapter contains five cases. Each supplies a packet, starter prompt, authored result, review, reusable skill, workflow extension, and evaluation; most also include a separate correction section. The workshop companion selects a main exercise from each chapter and gives routes through the remaining cases. ### Chapter 9. Human Resources - **HR-01.** Prepare a seasonal hiring brief - **HR-02.** Build an onboarding plan with real dependencies - **HR-03.** Prepare a feedback conversation from observable evidence - **HR-04.** Answer a policy question and recognize its limits - **HR-05.** Turn employee feedback into a reviewable action proposal ### Chapter 10. Finance - **FIN-01.** Explain monthly variances without inventing causes - **FIN-02.** Compare event budget scenarios - **FIN-03.** Prepare an invoice exception packet - **FIN-04.** Collect a forecast and challenge its assumptions - **FIN-05.** Prepare a capital request with inspectable assumptions ### Chapter 11. Legal - **LEG-01.** Make a contract intake packet usable - **LEG-02.** Compare a draft with an approved playbook - **LEG-03.** Build an obligations register without creating deadlines - **LEG-04.** Prepare a factual incident chronology - **LEG-05.** Turn approved guidance into operating instructions ### Chapter 12. Sales - **SAL-01.** Turn a group inquiry into a useful first response - **SAL-02.** Turn discovery notes into an internal proposal draft - **SAL-03.** Build an evidence-based RFP response matrix - **SAL-04.** Prepare a follow-up without inventing the buyer's intent - **SAL-05.** Hand a signed event to the delivery team ### Chapter 13. Learning and Development - **LND-01.** Turn expert knowledge into a usable job aid - **LND-02.** Build a learning path around a role task - **LND-03.** Create guest scenarios with a defensible answer key - **LND-04.** Find the learning materials affected by a procedure change - **LND-05.** Interpret feedback and assessment without overstating learning ### Chapter 14. Executive Leadership - **EXE-01.** Prepare a weekly brief that separates facts from decisions - **EXE-02.** Reconcile conflicting reports before choosing a number - **EXE-03.** Compare strategic options without inventing precision - **EXE-04.** Prepare a board briefing with traceable claims - **EXE-05.** Track decisions without marking intentions complete ### Chapter 15. Operations - **OPS-01.** Prepare a shift handoff from mixed-status records - **OPS-02.** Assemble an event-readiness review - **OPS-03.** Prepare a service-disruption coordination note - **OPS-04.** Look for recurring failures without declaring a root cause - **OPS-05.** Adapt a shared procedure to another property ### Chapter 16. Marketing and Communications - **MKT-01.** Develop a seasonal campaign from approved facts - **MKT-02.** Adapt an approved offer without changing it - **MKT-03.** Review brand voice and factual claims together - **MKT-04.** Use guest-review themes to improve information - **MKT-05.** Explain an internal change before it takes effect ### Chapter 17. Customer Service and Success - **CSS-01.** Draft an answer without promising an exception - **CSS-02.** Reconstruct a complaint and prepare recovery options - **CSS-03.** Update a group client on confirmed and open items - **CSS-04.** Turn post-event feedback into a follow-up draft - **CSS-05.** Maintain a service knowledge entry when its source changes ### Chapter 18. Information Technology - **IT-01.** Turn a support message into a usable intake record - **IT-02.** Retrieve the right troubleshooting guidance - **IT-03.** Check an access request against actual approval scope - **IT-04.** Explain a scheduled system change accurately - **IT-05.** Prepare an incident handoff without declaring recovery ### Chapter 19. Cybersecurity, Risk, and Compliance - **RSK-01.** Prepare a security report for the right responder - **RSK-02.** Review vendor evidence for the proposed use - **RSK-03.** Map a policy requirement to evidence without declaring compliance - **RSK-04.** Prepare an access-review exception list - **RSK-05.** Build a tabletop exercise that tests decisions ### Chapter 20. Procurement - **PRO-01.** Turn an informal request into requirements worth quoting - **PRO-02.** Compare quoted costs on a common basis - **PRO-03.** Check supplier onboarding without treating receipt as verification - **PRO-04.** Review supplier performance without inventing causes - **PRO-05.** Prepare a renewal decision with its dependencies ### Chapter 21. Service Development, Engineering, and Innovation - **INN-01.** Turn guest questions into a service concept - **INN-02.** Design a pilot around a decision - **INN-03.** Scope a facilities work request from observations - **INN-04.** Organize equipment evidence before choosing a remedy - **INN-05.** Review pilot results before expanding the service ### Chapter 22. Data and Analytics - **DAT-01.** Turn a broad question into an analysis brief - **DAT-02.** Write a metric definition that can be reproduced - **DAT-03.** Review data quality before summarizing it - **DAT-04.** Interpret bookings and cancellations at a stated cutoff - **DAT-05.** Interpret an AI pilot with time and quality together ## Separate practice additions in the revised edition The main company records above remain the reference snapshots. The following additions belong only to their named practice exercises: | Case | Practice addition | How to use it | | --- | --- | --- | | OPS-01 | H6 records eight linen bundles at 5:12 p.m., receipt TEST-R-52 | Update the handoff cutoff to 5:15; preserve unrelated statuses and leave total order fulfillment unassessed | | EXE-03 | A Lakehaven observation visit adds an estimated 600 USD and eight hours; an adaptation note adds 300 USD and four hours | Develop A-plus, then test a separate 36-hour ceiling; no pilot or expenditure is approved by this exercise | | LND-03 | The facilitator represents the event-manager contact route in a paper rehearsal | Practice the conversation and written discrepancy note; a live session still needs the actual verified route | | MKT-01 | Erin requests a landing-page format for Direction B | Develop visible copy and a separate builder handoff; no channel or launch decision is implied | | LEG-03 | A simulated clock reaches December 1, December 15, January 4 at noon, and January 5 while O1–O4 remain unchanged | Prepare a paper review queue; the executed schedule, accepted planning assignment, and return receipt remain absent | | LND-04 | The proposed CLEAN-SETUP-02 change is traced into an asset revision plan | Use A1–A4 to identify the required edits and checks; no procedure approval or release date is added | | IT-01 | Connector fixture SUPPORT-BE-104 returns a timeout; readback finds test ticket TEST-T-104 with matching fields | Rehearse duplicate prevention and the unavailable-readback branch; no live ticket is created | | IT-02 | A four-step paper retrieval begins with the print-service entry | Trace source selection using the existing runbook entries; no live search performance is claimed | Use the case's full packet for each exercise. These practice additions do not establish a later operating history for J&M.