# Tamas Piros — full site text > Tamas Piros makes organisations capable with AI, team by team. There are two ways to work with him: The Power User Gap, which looks at how an organisation's teams work, finds where AI can do real work, and teaches the people who haven't worked it out to use it there, and the AI Engineering Workshop, a hands-on workshop that teaches one engineering team to work with coding agents such as Cursor, Claude Code, Codex and Antigravity, usually on its own codebase, and to build agents of its own, customised to what they're working on. As extra work he helps organisations put agents into their workflows, at the level of one person, one team or the whole organisation, and works alongside whoever owns an AI transformation on the change management that makes it stick. Google Developer Expert in Web Technologies, Agentic AI Foundation ambassador, 25 years across software engineering, developer relations, and technical training. Generated from https://tpiros.dev. The articles are not included here; fetch [https://tpiros.dev/blog/index.md](https://tpiros.dev/blog/index.md) for the full list, then any article's `.md` URL. --- # Tamas Piros | AI training for teams and engineering teams Source: https://tpiros.dev/ Your AI rollout didn't fail. It split. A few people now hand real work to AI. Everyone else got a faster search box. I close that gap, team by team, for SMEs and enterprises. There are two ways to work with me, for SMEs and enterprises, both run on your own work rather than a prepared example. The Power User Gap at /power-user-gap/: I look at how your teams work, find where AI can do real work, and teach the people who haven't worked it out to use it there. The AI Engineering Workshop at /ai-engineering-workshop/ is a hands-on workshop for one engineering team, in two halves: working with coding agents such as Cursor, Claude Code, Codex and Antigravity, usually on their own codebase, and building agents of their own. It is customised to what they're working on. Both are sold to an organisation and scoped in a conversation; there are no individual seats and no published prices. I can also put agents into your workflows, for one person, a team or the whole organisation, as extra work. That starts as a conversation and isn't priced. Also here for: keynotes, talks, fireside chats and panels for leadership teams and conferences at /speaking-for-leaders/, and AI training for luxury and heritage houses at /power-user-gap/luxury-and-heritage/. ## Same task, same tool, two different jobs What most people send: > Write a summary of this report for the leadership team. What your top 5% send: > Here is the report, and the three slides the board saw last quarter. Summarise it for our leadership team, who already know the background and want what changed. One page. Lead with anything that moves a number. Flag anything you're unsure about rather than smoothing it over. EY's Work Reimagined Survey (August 2025, 15,000 employees and 1,500 employers, 29 countries): 88% of employees use AI at work, mostly for search and summarising, and 5% use it in ways that change how they work. Nobody taught anyone the second version. The people who write it worked it out on your documents and your approvals. I teach it on your own work. ## What's on offer - **The Power User Gap**: Most organisations that rolled AI out didn't fail at it; they split. A minority worked out how to hand real work to these tools, and everybody else settled for a faster way to look things up. The engagement finds where AI can do real work in the organisation's own workflows and teaches everybody else to use it there. It is taught as 4 courses, one per group of teams, and the call picks one or several: AI for sales, customer success and support; AI for operations and finance; AI for HR and people teams; AI for legal teams. (An SME or enterprise that rolled AI out and watched usage split, taught to the people who haven't worked it out: non-technical staff such as customer success, sales, support, operations, HR, finance and legal, with nothing to code; bought by whoever is responsible for getting people using AI, whatever their title; A review of the workflows the organisation chooses, through its team leads and process documents, then teaching on them. Remote or on-site, no pre-work for attendees) - **The AI Engineering Workshop**: A hands-on workshop in AI engineering, in two halves: working with coding agents such as Cursor, Claude Code, Codex and Antigravity, usually on the team's own codebase, and building agents, agentic workflows and harnesses. Customised to what the team is working on. The building-agents half draws on the free book AI Engineering for Web Developers. (One engineering team, in an SME or an enterprise; Hands-on, remote or on-site: the team listens, then writes the code. Customised in a call first) Engagements are scoped in a conversation, and nothing is priced. ## What people say about the teaching > Our audience has been tremendously impacted with Tamas's educational content throughout the past years, leaving with practical insights & knowledge ready to be applied on Monday! J. Gerards, Frontend Revolution > Tamas isn't just a well-prepared professional, he's also someone who offers insightful perspectives on the present and future of AI. I really enjoyed exchanging experiences with him and picking up some of his know-how along the way. G. Galassi, Freelance developer ## Judge the teaching before you book it - [AI Engineering for Web Developers](https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-for-web-developers/): free, read online, no sign-up. From your first API call to building autonomous agents, written for working web developers. The building-agents half of the AI Engineering Workshop draws on it. - [Artisanal Intelligence](https://tpiros.dev/artisanal-intelligence/): AI deployed with restraint, judgement and taste, for heritage houses and the technologists who serve them. ## Credentials - Google Developer Expert in Web Technologies - Agentic AI Foundation ambassador (Linux Foundation project) - MBA - BSc in Software Engineering - Guest lecturer at a European technology university - Trained developers through learning platforms, books and video courses ## Elsewhere on this site - [The Power User Gap](https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/): for an organisation whose AI rollout split in two. - [The AI Engineering Workshop](https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-workshop/): a hands-on workshop for one engineering team. - [Writing](https://tpiros.dev/blog/): 200+ technical articles on AI engineering, agents, and MCP. - [Ctrl+Alt+Delegate, the newsletter](https://tpiros.dev/newsletter/): The three-finger salute for work you should not be doing yourself. - [Speaking](https://tpiros.dev/speaking-for-leaders/): keynotes, talks, fireside chats and panels for leaders, the speaker kit, and the archive of past talks and workshops. - [About](https://tpiros.dev/about/): my background and credentials. - [llms.txt](https://tpiros.dev/llms.txt): a summary of this site written for language models. ## Before you book **What is the teaching like?** Customised. The curriculum is put together for your team and the work in front of them after the call, not taken off a shelf. For the Power User Gap that means your own workflows and documents, for people whose job is not technical, with nothing to code. For the AI Engineering Workshop it means your engineers' own coding agent, usually on their own codebase, or the free book, AI Engineering for Web Developers, when they are building agents of their own. **Which AI tools does it cover?** For the Power User Gap, ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini, whichever you already pay for: the work is finding where it can do real work in your workflows, then teaching people to use it there. For the AI Engineering Workshop, Cursor, Claude Code, Codex or Antigravity for working with coding agents, and OpenAI, Anthropic or Google for building them. **What do attendees need to prepare?** Nothing. The scoping happens between us before the teaching, and people arrive with their own work. **Remote or on-site?** Either, anywhere in the world, on your own tasks and systems rather than a prepared example. Teams in different countries get the same teaching without anyone flying anywhere. **Is it recorded?** No. The teaching is live, in your room or on your call, and built around your own work rather than a syllabus that could be replayed. **What does it cost?** It is quoted against the scope we agree on the call. Nothing is priced on this site, because no two organisations need the same amount of work, and there are no individual seats. **What happens after the call?** If the Power User Gap or the AI Engineering Workshop fits what you need, I scope it and quote it. If neither does, I say so on the call. **What else can it include?** More cohorts, briefings for managers, follow-up clinics and change management. Putting agents into your workflows, for one person, a team or the whole organisation, is available as extra work alongside the teaching. ## Start by booking some time - Book a 30-minute call: https://calendly.com/tamas-piros/30min - Email: hello@tamaspiros.com --- # About Tamas Piros Source: https://tpiros.dev/about/ Hi, I'm Tamas. I've spent 25 years in software engineering, developer relations and technical training, working across Europe, Asia Pacific and the Americas. I've led regional developer advocacy at a cloud media platform, running AI workshops and enablement programmes for engineering teams across the region. Before that I was a principal technical instructor teaching NoSQL databases to enterprise teams, led developer advocacy at an open-source AI-workflow platform, and built a training business. I've given 74 talks and 77 workshops across 35 countries since 2014, on web performance and developer education for most of that time, and on AI, agents, agent harnesses and MCP more recently. I'm a Google Developer Expert in Web Technologies and an ambassador for the Agentic AI Foundation. I hold an MBA and a BSc in Software Engineering. Two ways to work with me: The Power User Gap, for organisations where AI went out and only a handful of people got anywhere with it, and the AI Engineering Workshop, for engineering teams learning to work with coding agents and to build agents of their own. ## Credentials - Google Developer Expert in Web Technologies - Agentic AI Foundation ambassador (Linux Foundation project) - MBA - BSc in Software Engineering - Guest lecturer at a European technology university - Trained developers through learning platforms, books and video courses ## Why this work A new technology arrives, everyone gets excited, vendors make promises, organisations buy tools, and nothing changes, because nobody learned how to use them. AI differs in one way that matters. It moves fast enough that the gap between the teams building with it and everyone else widens by the month. The practical end is the part I enjoy most. Which parts of one person's week an agent should own, the same for a team's workflow, and at the organisation level the transformation work that makes it stick: the sequencing, who goes first, what gets measured, and what everybody else is told. ## Two books, two audiences - [AI Engineering for Web Developers](https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-for-web-developers/): free, read online. From aware-but-not-building to shipping a real AI agent. - [Artisanal Intelligence](https://tpiros.dev/artisanal-intelligence/): AI deployed with restraint and judgement, for luxury leaders and the technologists who serve them. ## Contact - Email: hello@tamaspiros.com - LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tpiros - Book a 30-minute call: https://calendly.com/tamas-piros/30min --- # The Power User Gap: AI training for non-technical teams Source: https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/ 88% of your people use AI. About 5% use it well. I look at how your teams work, find where AI can do real work in it, and teach your people to use it there, whether you're an SME or an enterprise. For whoever is responsible for getting non-technical people using AI. Nothing to code. The Power User Gap is the split EY's Work Reimagined Survey measured in August 2025: 88% of employees use AI at work, mostly for search and summarising, and 5% use it to change how they work. EY's Work Reimagined Survey (August 2025, 15,000 employees and 1,500 employers across 29 countries) found 88% of employees using AI at work "primarily limited to basic tasks such as search and summarization", and only 5% "using it in advanced ways to transform the way they work". ## How it works You see what changed, team by team. The people attending say how they use AI before anything is taught, and what they hand to it after. It works with whatever tools you've already bought. Remote or on-site, so teams in different countries get the same teaching without anyone flying anywhere. No pre-work for attendees. **For when someone asks what the licences bought.** You hear from the people attending how they use AI before anything is taught, and from the same people afterwards what they now hand to AI and where they still don't. That's the before and after, team by team, to take to whoever approved the spend. 1. A 30-minute call. Where your rollout is, and which teams or workflows you'd like to start with. 2. I look at how your teams work. I talk to the team leads and go through the process documents for the workflows you've chosen, and suggest others where I see a better place to start. How long it takes depends on the scope we agree. 3. A baseline before anything is taught. The people attending say how they use AI on those workflows today and how that work gets done. That is the mark everything after is measured against. 4. I teach your people to use AI there. Remote or on-site, for the people who haven't worked it out yet. They learn to use AI on those workflows, so they do that work more efficiently and AI becomes the first thing they reach for. Your power users are welcome to join. 5. What changed. After the teaching, the same people say what they now hand to AI and where they still don't. You see the change against the baseline, team by team, and we decide where the next cohort starts. ## Four courses, one engagement Each course is taught on that team's own workflows, from the review. The call picks one or several, and they're quoted together as one engagement. - **AI for sales, customer success and support**: Briefing yourself before an account call, answering customers from your own help articles and past replies, and turning a call into the follow-up email and the CRM entry. Whoever sends it reads and corrects it first. - **AI for operations and finance**: Month-end commentary, variance notes and status reports built from the spreadsheets and exports you already produce, and process documents written up from how the work is done day to day. The figures come from the source file, and people learn to check them there. - **AI for HR and people teams**: Job descriptions, interview questions, onboarding packs and answers to policy questions, drafted from your own handbook. Anything that decides something about a person stays with a person. - **AI for legal teams**: Reading a contract against your standard terms, summarising a long bundle with clause references, and drafting the letters around a matter, for in-house teams and law firms. A lawyer reviews everything it produces and stays responsible for it. ## Who is in the room The people who have not worked it out yet, whatever their job: customer success, sales, support, operations, HR, finance, legal. No technical background, and nothing to code. Your power users are welcome, and it works with the tools you have already bought. If your rollout has not started yet, the teaching works just as well before the licences go out. An engineering team is different work: the AI Engineering Workshop at https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-workshop/ teaches them to work with coding agents and to build agents, by the same person, so one conversation can cover both. ## What they leave able to do They use AI on their own workflows to do that work more efficiently, and reach for it first in their day-to-day work. ## What the gap looks like Same task, same tool, two different jobs. What most people send: > Write a summary of this report for the leadership team. What your top 5% send: > Here is the report, and the three slides the board saw last quarter. Summarise it for our leadership team, who already know the background and want what changed. One page. Lead with anything that moves a number. Flag anything you're unsure about rather than smoothing it over. Nobody taught anyone the second version. The people who write it worked it out on your documents and your approvals, which is why no vendor course covers it. I teach it on your own work. ## Why the gap is still there You have probably tried some of these already. This is what each one leaves you with. - The vendor's own course: teaches the product, the features, the modes, what the assistant can do. Your power users didn't learn there. They worked it out on your documents and your approvals, which no vendor has seen. - An e-learning platform: produces completion rates. Everyone finishes the module, and on Monday the same one-line prompts go out as before. - Your own power users: they can show what they do, and they often will. They can't see where their habits came from, and they have their own jobs, so the rest of the team gets a lunchtime demo and a link. - A generic AI trainer: runs the same day for every organisation, on prepared examples. Here the teaching starts from your workflows, so what people practise is the work they go back to. ## Where the gap shows up first The same split appears wherever the licences went out to everyone. This is the work I'd start with. Each setting has its own page. - Professional services (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/professional-services/): the first draft of a client report, the research behind a recommendation, a proposal that has to read as if a partner wrote it. The 5% already hand these over and check the result. Everyone else still starts from a blank page. - Financial services and insurance (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/financial-services-and-insurance/): policy documents, client communications and regulatory reporting, where the tools have to be used inside the rules. The work is finding what can be handed over without moving the line on accuracy. - Technology and telecoms (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/technology-and-telecoms/): engineering got the training and the rest of the company got the licences. Sales, support, operations, HR and legal are where the gap is widest, and where most of the hours are. - Legal (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/legal/): first-pass reviews of long documents, research starting points, first drafts of letters and clauses. The 5% already hand these over and check every line. Everyone else still reads and drafts from scratch, fee earners and support teams alike. - Luxury and heritage (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/luxury-and-heritage/): client follow-ups, product and heritage copy, the same story adapted for every market. The 5% already hand over the first draft and keep the house voice. Everyone else writes it all by hand, or keeps away from the tools. ## Who is teaching 74 talks and 77 workshops in 35 countries since 2014. Google Developer Expert, Agentic AI Foundation ambassador. ## What else the engagement can include - A talk for the whole company: the split, shown to everyone at once, so the teams being taught know why before the teaching starts. See https://tpiros.dev/speaking-for-leaders/. - More cohorts: the same teaching for the next teams. - Briefings for managers: for the managers of the teams being taught. - Follow-up clinics: time with the people who attended, on what they run into back at work. - Change management: working with whoever owns the rollout on the change around it. - Agents in the workflows: putting agents into the workflows we reviewed, for one person, one team or the organisation, as extra work alongside the teaching. ## Before you book **Do attendees need a technical background?** No. This is for the people whose job is not technical, and nothing in it involves code. The people who do write code are better served by the AI Engineering Workshop. **Which AI tools does it cover?** ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini, whichever you already pay for. The work is finding where it can do real work in your workflows, then teaching people to use it there. **What do attendees need to prepare?** Nothing. There is no pre-work. The scoping happens between us before the teaching. **Who should be in the room?** The people who have not worked it out yet. Your power users are welcome to join, and they usually do. **Is it recorded?** No. The teaching is live, on your own workflows, in your room or on your call. **What does it cost?** It is quoted against the scope we agree on the call. Nothing is priced on this site because no two organisations need the same amount of work. ## Next step Book a 30-minute call at https://calendly.com/tamas-piros/30min, or email hello@tamaspiros.com. Tell me when the tools went out and which teams you'd start with. It's one quote, for the workflow review and the teaching of the teams we agree on the call, so the figure you forward covers all of it. Nothing here is priced. --- # AI training for professional services teams Source: https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/professional-services/ AI training for professional services teams, on their own client work. In professional services the split shows first in client work: the first draft of a report, the research behind a recommendation, a proposal that has to read as if a partner wrote it. I look at how your teams do that work, find where AI can do it, and teach your people to use it there. For whoever is responsible for getting non-technical people using AI. Nothing to code. The Power User Gap is the split EY's Work Reimagined Survey measured in August 2025: 88% of employees use AI at work, mostly for search and summarising, and 5% use it to change how they work. EY's Work Reimagined Survey (August 2025, 15,000 employees and 1,500 employers across 29 countries) found 88% of employees using AI at work "primarily limited to basic tasks such as search and summarization", and only 5% "using it in advanced ways to transform the way they work". ## Where the gap shows in professional services The Power User Gap for professional services teaches the consultants, advisers, accountants, analysts and support staff in a professional services firm to hand their own client work to ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini, and to check what comes back. These are the kinds of work I'd look at first. Your team leads and process documents decide which ones we actually start with. - **First drafts of client reports from notes.** Meeting notes, interview notes and the last report in the same series go in, and a structured first draft comes out for the person who owns it to rewrite and sign off. Most people still start these from a blank page. - **Research synthesis.** Pulling the points that matter out of a stack of sources, with each claim tied to where it came from, so the reviewer checks the sources instead of redoing the reading. - **Proposal and pitch preparation.** Turning a brief and the firm's past proposals into a first structure, the questions the client is likely to ask, and a draft in the house style. - **Meeting notes to actions.** A call transcript or rough notes turned into decisions, owners and the follow-up email, in the format the team already uses. - **A read before it goes out.** Asking the tool to read a draft the way the client will, and to flag gaps, inconsistencies and claims with nothing behind them, before a senior reviewer sees it. **What the teaching looks like there.** First the people attending say how they do this work today, which is the baseline. Then they practise on their own client work with the tool the firm already pays for: what context to give it, how to ask for a draft they can use, and how to check it against the sources before it carries anyone's name. Afterwards the same people say what they now hand to AI and what they still do by hand. ## How it works You see what changed, team by team. The people attending say how they use AI before anything is taught, and what they hand to it after. It works with whatever tools you've already bought. Remote or on-site, so teams in different countries get the same teaching without anyone flying anywhere. No pre-work for attendees. **For when someone asks what the licences bought.** You hear from the people attending how they use AI before anything is taught, and from the same people afterwards what they now hand to AI and where they still don't. That's the before and after, team by team, to take to whoever approved the spend. 1. A 30-minute call. Where your rollout is, and which teams or workflows you'd like to start with. 2. I look at how your teams work. I talk to the team leads and go through the process documents for the workflows you've chosen, and suggest others where I see a better place to start. How long it takes depends on the scope we agree. 3. A baseline before anything is taught. The people attending say how they use AI on those workflows today and how that work gets done. That is the mark everything after is measured against. 4. I teach your people to use AI there. Remote or on-site, for the people who haven't worked it out yet. They learn to use AI on those workflows, so they do that work more efficiently and AI becomes the first thing they reach for. Your power users are welcome to join. 5. What changed. After the teaching, the same people say what they now hand to AI and where they still don't. You see the change against the baseline, team by team, and we decide where the next cohort starts. The teaching comes as named courses, one per group of teams, and the call picks which. They are listed at https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/#courses. ## Who is in the room The people who have not worked it out yet, whatever their job: customer success, sales, support, operations, HR, finance, legal. No technical background, and nothing to code. Your power users are welcome, and it works with the tools you have already bought. If your rollout has not started yet, the teaching works just as well before the licences go out. An engineering team is different work: the AI Engineering Workshop at https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-workshop/ teaches them to work with coding agents and to build agents, by the same person, so one conversation can cover both. ## What they leave able to do They use AI on their own workflows to do that work more efficiently, and reach for it first in their day-to-day work. ## What the gap looks like Same task, same tool, two different jobs. What most people send: > Write a summary of this report for the leadership team. What your top 5% send: > Here is the report, and the three slides the board saw last quarter. Summarise it for our leadership team, who already know the background and want what changed. One page. Lead with anything that moves a number. Flag anything you're unsure about rather than smoothing it over. Nobody taught anyone the second version. The people who write it worked it out on your documents and your approvals, which is why no vendor course covers it. I teach it on your own work. ## Why the gap is still there You have probably tried some of these already. This is what each one leaves you with. - The vendor's own course: teaches the product, the features, the modes, what the assistant can do. Your power users didn't learn there. They worked it out on your documents and your approvals, which no vendor has seen. - An e-learning platform: produces completion rates. Everyone finishes the module, and on Monday the same one-line prompts go out as before. - Your own power users: they can show what they do, and they often will. They can't see where their habits came from, and they have their own jobs, so the rest of the team gets a lunchtime demo and a link. - A generic AI trainer: runs the same day for every organisation, on prepared examples. Here the teaching starts from your workflows, so what people practise is the work they go back to. ## Where the gap shows up first The same split appears wherever the licences went out to everyone. This is the work I'd start with. Each setting has its own page. - Professional services (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/professional-services/): the first draft of a client report, the research behind a recommendation, a proposal that has to read as if a partner wrote it. The 5% already hand these over and check the result. Everyone else still starts from a blank page. - Financial services and insurance (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/financial-services-and-insurance/): policy documents, client communications and regulatory reporting, where the tools have to be used inside the rules. The work is finding what can be handed over without moving the line on accuracy. - Technology and telecoms (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/technology-and-telecoms/): engineering got the training and the rest of the company got the licences. Sales, support, operations, HR and legal are where the gap is widest, and where most of the hours are. - Legal (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/legal/): first-pass reviews of long documents, research starting points, first drafts of letters and clauses. The 5% already hand these over and check every line. Everyone else still reads and drafts from scratch, fee earners and support teams alike. - Luxury and heritage (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/luxury-and-heritage/): client follow-ups, product and heritage copy, the same story adapted for every market. The 5% already hand over the first draft and keep the house voice. Everyone else writes it all by hand, or keeps away from the tools. ## Who is teaching 74 talks and 77 workshops in 35 countries since 2014. Google Developer Expert, Agentic AI Foundation ambassador. ## What else the engagement can include - A talk for the whole company: the split, shown to everyone at once, so the teams being taught know why before the teaching starts. See https://tpiros.dev/speaking-for-leaders/. - More cohorts: the same teaching for the next teams. - Briefings for managers: for the managers of the teams being taught. - Follow-up clinics: time with the people who attended, on what they run into back at work. - Change management: working with whoever owns the rollout on the change around it. - Agents in the workflows: putting agents into the workflows we reviewed, for one person, one team or the organisation, as extra work alongside the teaching. ## Before you book **Does it work within our firm's AI policy?** It works with the tools and the policy you already have. Where the policy says which tools are approved and what can go into them, the teaching follows it on every workflow. Writing the policy stays with you, and nothing here is legal or regulatory advice. **Is it only for the people who bill clients?** No. Anyone whose work runs through the workflows we choose can attend: consultants, analysts, bid and proposal teams, practice support and operations. Nothing in it involves code. **Can people practise on real client work?** They practise on the workflows we chose in the review, with the kind of material they handle every day. What can be used in the room follows your firm's own rules on client data. **Which AI tools does it use?** ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini, whichever your firm already pays for. **What do attendees need to prepare?** Nothing. There is no pre-work. The scoping happens between us before the teaching. **What does it cost?** It is quoted against the scope we agree on the call. Nothing is priced on this site because no two organisations need the same amount of work. Questions about the tools, who attends and recording are answered at https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/. ## Next step Book a 30-minute call at https://calendly.com/tamas-piros/30min, or email hello@tamaspiros.com. Tell me when the tools went out and which teams you'd start with. It's one quote, for the workflow review and the teaching of the teams we agree on the call, so the figure you forward covers all of it. Nothing here is priced. --- # AI training for financial services and insurance teams Source: https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/financial-services-and-insurance/ AI training for financial services and insurance teams, inside the rules. In financial services and insurance the split shows first in the documents that have to be right: policy wording, client communications, regulatory reporting. The work is finding what can be handed to AI inside the rules, and teaching your people to do it there. For whoever is responsible for getting non-technical people using AI. Nothing to code. The Power User Gap is the split EY's Work Reimagined Survey measured in August 2025: 88% of employees use AI at work, mostly for search and summarising, and 5% use it to change how they work. EY's Work Reimagined Survey (August 2025, 15,000 employees and 1,500 employers across 29 countries) found 88% of employees using AI at work "primarily limited to basic tasks such as search and summarization", and only 5% "using it in advanced ways to transform the way they work". ## Where the gap shows in financial services and insurance The Power User Gap for financial services and insurance teaches the non-technical people in a bank, insurer or other financial firm to use ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini on the documents they handle, inside the AI policy the firm already has. These are the kinds of work I'd look at first. Your team leads and process documents decide which ones we actually start with. - **Policy and procedure lookups.** Finding what the internal procedure says about a case, with the section quoted, so anyone can check the answer against the source before acting on it. - **Summarising long documents for review.** A policy wording, a claims file or a credit paper cut down to the points a reviewer needs, with page references, so the review starts in the right place. - **Customer correspondence, drafted for a person to check.** First drafts of letters and emails in the approved tone. A person reads, corrects and sends every one, and stays accountable for what goes out. - **Checking a document against a checklist.** Running a document past the firm's own checklist and listing what is missing or inconsistent, as a first pass before the human review. - **Staying inside the AI policy.** Which tools are approved, what data can go into them and what has to stay out is already decided by your firm. The teaching works inside those lines and makes them concrete for each workflow. **What the teaching looks like there.** The baseline comes first: the people attending say how they handle these documents today and where they already use AI, if they do. Then they practise on their own work with the approved tool, and much of the time goes on checking: asking for sources and page references, spotting where the tool has guessed, and knowing which work stays with a person. Afterwards the same people say what they now hand to AI and where they still don't, so the change shows against the baseline, team by team. ## How it works You see what changed, team by team. The people attending say how they use AI before anything is taught, and what they hand to it after. It works with whatever tools you've already bought. Remote or on-site, so teams in different countries get the same teaching without anyone flying anywhere. No pre-work for attendees. **For when someone asks what the licences bought.** You hear from the people attending how they use AI before anything is taught, and from the same people afterwards what they now hand to AI and where they still don't. That's the before and after, team by team, to take to whoever approved the spend. 1. A 30-minute call. Where your rollout is, and which teams or workflows you'd like to start with. 2. I look at how your teams work. I talk to the team leads and go through the process documents for the workflows you've chosen, and suggest others where I see a better place to start. How long it takes depends on the scope we agree. 3. A baseline before anything is taught. The people attending say how they use AI on those workflows today and how that work gets done. That is the mark everything after is measured against. 4. I teach your people to use AI there. Remote or on-site, for the people who haven't worked it out yet. They learn to use AI on those workflows, so they do that work more efficiently and AI becomes the first thing they reach for. Your power users are welcome to join. 5. What changed. After the teaching, the same people say what they now hand to AI and where they still don't. You see the change against the baseline, team by team, and we decide where the next cohort starts. The teaching comes as named courses, one per group of teams, and the call picks which. They are listed at https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/#courses. ## Who is in the room The people who have not worked it out yet, whatever their job: customer success, sales, support, operations, HR, finance, legal. No technical background, and nothing to code. Your power users are welcome, and it works with the tools you have already bought. If your rollout has not started yet, the teaching works just as well before the licences go out. An engineering team is different work: the AI Engineering Workshop at https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-workshop/ teaches them to work with coding agents and to build agents, by the same person, so one conversation can cover both. ## What they leave able to do They use AI on their own workflows to do that work more efficiently, and reach for it first in their day-to-day work. ## What the gap looks like Same task, same tool, two different jobs. What most people send: > Write a summary of this report for the leadership team. What your top 5% send: > Here is the report, and the three slides the board saw last quarter. Summarise it for our leadership team, who already know the background and want what changed. One page. Lead with anything that moves a number. Flag anything you're unsure about rather than smoothing it over. Nobody taught anyone the second version. The people who write it worked it out on your documents and your approvals, which is why no vendor course covers it. I teach it on your own work. ## Why the gap is still there You have probably tried some of these already. This is what each one leaves you with. - The vendor's own course: teaches the product, the features, the modes, what the assistant can do. Your power users didn't learn there. They worked it out on your documents and your approvals, which no vendor has seen. - An e-learning platform: produces completion rates. Everyone finishes the module, and on Monday the same one-line prompts go out as before. - Your own power users: they can show what they do, and they often will. They can't see where their habits came from, and they have their own jobs, so the rest of the team gets a lunchtime demo and a link. - A generic AI trainer: runs the same day for every organisation, on prepared examples. Here the teaching starts from your workflows, so what people practise is the work they go back to. ## Where the gap shows up first The same split appears wherever the licences went out to everyone. This is the work I'd start with. Each setting has its own page. - Financial services and insurance (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/financial-services-and-insurance/): policy documents, client communications and regulatory reporting, where the tools have to be used inside the rules. The work is finding what can be handed over without moving the line on accuracy. - Professional services (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/professional-services/): the first draft of a client report, the research behind a recommendation, a proposal that has to read as if a partner wrote it. The 5% already hand these over and check the result. Everyone else still starts from a blank page. - Technology and telecoms (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/technology-and-telecoms/): engineering got the training and the rest of the company got the licences. Sales, support, operations, HR and legal are where the gap is widest, and where most of the hours are. - Legal (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/legal/): first-pass reviews of long documents, research starting points, first drafts of letters and clauses. The 5% already hand these over and check every line. Everyone else still reads and drafts from scratch, fee earners and support teams alike. - Luxury and heritage (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/luxury-and-heritage/): client follow-ups, product and heritage copy, the same story adapted for every market. The 5% already hand over the first draft and keep the house voice. Everyone else writes it all by hand, or keeps away from the tools. ## Who is teaching 74 talks and 77 workshops in 35 countries since 2014. Google Developer Expert, Agentic AI Foundation ambassador. ## What else the engagement can include - A talk for the whole company: the split, shown to everyone at once, so the teams being taught know why before the teaching starts. See https://tpiros.dev/speaking-for-leaders/. - More cohorts: the same teaching for the next teams. - Briefings for managers: for the managers of the teams being taught. - Follow-up clinics: time with the people who attended, on what they run into back at work. - Change management: working with whoever owns the rollout on the change around it. - Agents in the workflows: putting agents into the workflows we reviewed, for one person, one team or the organisation, as extra work alongside the teaching. ## Before you book **Can it work inside our AI policy and the rules we operate under?** It works with the tools and the policy you already have. Which tools are approved and what data may go into them is your firm's decision, and the teaching follows it on each workflow. Nothing here is legal or regulatory advice. **Does AI replace the human review?** No. Everything in it assumes a person checks what the tool produced before it is used. Much of the teaching is about making that check easier: asking for sources and page references, and for a flag wherever the tool is unsure. **Which teams is it for?** The people who handle the documents: customer service, claims, underwriting and operations teams, HR and finance. No technical background, and nothing to code. **Can we start before the tools are fully rolled out?** Yes. The teaching works before the licences go out as well as after. **What do attendees need to prepare?** Nothing. There is no pre-work. The scoping happens between us before the teaching. **What does it cost?** It is quoted against the scope we agree on the call. Nothing is priced on this site because no two organisations need the same amount of work. Questions about the tools, who attends and recording are answered at https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/. ## Next step Book a 30-minute call at https://calendly.com/tamas-piros/30min, or email hello@tamaspiros.com. Tell me when the tools went out and which teams you'd start with. It's one quote, for the workflow review and the teaching of the teams we agree on the call, so the figure you forward covers all of it. Nothing here is priced. --- # AI training for non-engineering teams in tech companies Source: https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/technology-and-telecoms/ AI training for non-engineering teams in tech companies. In technology and telecoms, engineering got the training and everyone else got the licences. Sales, support, operations, HR and legal are where the gap is widest, and where the hours are. I look at how those teams work, find where AI can do real work in it, and teach them to use it there. For whoever is responsible for getting non-technical people using AI. Nothing to code. The Power User Gap is the split EY's Work Reimagined Survey measured in August 2025: 88% of employees use AI at work, mostly for search and summarising, and 5% use it to change how they work. EY's Work Reimagined Survey (August 2025, 15,000 employees and 1,500 employers across 29 countries) found 88% of employees using AI at work "primarily limited to basic tasks such as search and summarization", and only 5% "using it in advanced ways to transform the way they work". ## Where the gap shows in technology and telecoms The Power User Gap for technology and telecoms teaches the sales, support, operations, HR and legal teams in a technology or telecoms company to use ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini on their own work. These are the kinds of work I'd look at first. Your team leads and process documents decide which ones we actually start with. - **Support ticket summaries.** A long ticket thread turned into what the customer asked, what was tried and what is still open, ready for the handover or the escalation. - **Sales call preparation.** The account notes, the last few emails and what the prospect has published, pulled into a short brief and the questions worth asking on the call. - **Internal policy questions.** HR and operations answer the same questions about leave, expenses and process again and again. The tool drafts the answer from the policy document and quotes the line it relied on. - **First reads of contracts.** A first pass for legal and commercial teams: the clauses that differ from your standard terms, the dates and obligations, and what deserves a close look. A lawyer still reads it. - **Operations updates.** Exports, status notes and chat threads turned into the summary the team sends round, with the numbers taken from the source rather than retyped. **What the teaching looks like there.** These teams sit next to engineers who got the training first, so the baseline often shows a wide spread: a few people with habits of their own, and many who stopped at asking questions. They practise on their own tickets, accounts, policies and contracts, with the tools the company already pays for, and nothing in it involves code. Afterwards the same people say what they now hand to AI and where they still don't, which is the change against the baseline. ## How it works You see what changed, team by team. The people attending say how they use AI before anything is taught, and what they hand to it after. It works with whatever tools you've already bought. Remote or on-site, so teams in different countries get the same teaching without anyone flying anywhere. No pre-work for attendees. **For when someone asks what the licences bought.** You hear from the people attending how they use AI before anything is taught, and from the same people afterwards what they now hand to AI and where they still don't. That's the before and after, team by team, to take to whoever approved the spend. 1. A 30-minute call. Where your rollout is, and which teams or workflows you'd like to start with. 2. I look at how your teams work. I talk to the team leads and go through the process documents for the workflows you've chosen, and suggest others where I see a better place to start. How long it takes depends on the scope we agree. 3. A baseline before anything is taught. The people attending say how they use AI on those workflows today and how that work gets done. That is the mark everything after is measured against. 4. I teach your people to use AI there. Remote or on-site, for the people who haven't worked it out yet. They learn to use AI on those workflows, so they do that work more efficiently and AI becomes the first thing they reach for. Your power users are welcome to join. 5. What changed. After the teaching, the same people say what they now hand to AI and where they still don't. You see the change against the baseline, team by team, and we decide where the next cohort starts. The teaching comes as named courses, one per group of teams, and the call picks which. They are listed at https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/#courses. ## Who is in the room The people who have not worked it out yet, whatever their job: customer success, sales, support, operations, HR, finance, legal. No technical background, and nothing to code. Your power users are welcome, and it works with the tools you have already bought. If your rollout has not started yet, the teaching works just as well before the licences go out. An engineering team is different work: the AI Engineering Workshop at https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-workshop/ teaches them to work with coding agents and to build agents, by the same person, so one conversation can cover both. ## What they leave able to do They use AI on their own workflows to do that work more efficiently, and reach for it first in their day-to-day work. ## What the gap looks like Same task, same tool, two different jobs. What most people send: > Write a summary of this report for the leadership team. What your top 5% send: > Here is the report, and the three slides the board saw last quarter. Summarise it for our leadership team, who already know the background and want what changed. One page. Lead with anything that moves a number. Flag anything you're unsure about rather than smoothing it over. Nobody taught anyone the second version. The people who write it worked it out on your documents and your approvals, which is why no vendor course covers it. I teach it on your own work. ## Why the gap is still there You have probably tried some of these already. This is what each one leaves you with. - The vendor's own course: teaches the product, the features, the modes, what the assistant can do. Your power users didn't learn there. They worked it out on your documents and your approvals, which no vendor has seen. - An e-learning platform: produces completion rates. Everyone finishes the module, and on Monday the same one-line prompts go out as before. - Your own power users: they can show what they do, and they often will. They can't see where their habits came from, and they have their own jobs, so the rest of the team gets a lunchtime demo and a link. - A generic AI trainer: runs the same day for every organisation, on prepared examples. Here the teaching starts from your workflows, so what people practise is the work they go back to. ## Where the gap shows up first The same split appears wherever the licences went out to everyone. This is the work I'd start with. Each setting has its own page. - Technology and telecoms (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/technology-and-telecoms/): engineering got the training and the rest of the company got the licences. Sales, support, operations, HR and legal are where the gap is widest, and where most of the hours are. - Professional services (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/professional-services/): the first draft of a client report, the research behind a recommendation, a proposal that has to read as if a partner wrote it. The 5% already hand these over and check the result. Everyone else still starts from a blank page. - Financial services and insurance (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/financial-services-and-insurance/): policy documents, client communications and regulatory reporting, where the tools have to be used inside the rules. The work is finding what can be handed over without moving the line on accuracy. - Legal (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/legal/): first-pass reviews of long documents, research starting points, first drafts of letters and clauses. The 5% already hand these over and check every line. Everyone else still reads and drafts from scratch, fee earners and support teams alike. - Luxury and heritage (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/luxury-and-heritage/): client follow-ups, product and heritage copy, the same story adapted for every market. The 5% already hand over the first draft and keep the house voice. Everyone else writes it all by hand, or keeps away from the tools. ## Who is teaching 74 talks and 77 workshops in 35 countries since 2014. Google Developer Expert, Agentic AI Foundation ambassador. ## What else the engagement can include - A talk for the whole company: the split, shown to everyone at once, so the teams being taught know why before the teaching starts. See https://tpiros.dev/speaking-for-leaders/. - More cohorts: the same teaching for the next teams. - Briefings for managers: for the managers of the teams being taught. - Follow-up clinics: time with the people who attended, on what they run into back at work. - Change management: working with whoever owns the rollout on the change around it. - Agents in the workflows: putting agents into the workflows we reviewed, for one person, one team or the organisation, as extra work alongside the teaching. ## Before you book **Our engineers already had AI training. Is this the same thing?** No. This is for the teams outside engineering, on their own work with ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini, and nothing in it involves code. Training for your engineering team is the AI Engineering Workshop, taught by the same person, so one conversation can cover both. **Does it work within our company's AI policy?** It works with the tools and the policy you already have, and the teaching follows the policy on each workflow. Writing it stays with you. **We already have power users in every team. Why bring someone in?** Your power users are welcome to join, and they usually do. They have their own jobs, and the habits they built are hard to see from the inside. The teaching takes what works on your own workflows to the people who haven't got there yet. **Which teams should go first?** We agree that on the call, and the workflow review can change it. A team with a lot of repeated written work, such as support or sales, is a good place to look first. **What do attendees need to prepare?** Nothing. There is no pre-work. The scoping happens between us before the teaching. **What does it cost?** It is quoted against the scope we agree on the call. Nothing is priced on this site because no two organisations need the same amount of work. Questions about the tools, who attends and recording are answered at https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/. ## Next step Book a 30-minute call at https://calendly.com/tamas-piros/30min, or email hello@tamaspiros.com. Tell me when the tools went out and which teams you'd start with. It's one quote, for the workflow review and the teaching of the teams we agree on the call, so the figure you forward covers all of it. Nothing here is priced. --- # AI training for law firms and legal teams Source: https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/legal/ AI training for law firms and in-house legal teams, on their own matters. AI training for law firms and in-house legal teams, taught to one firm's own people on its own matters and documents. I look at how your lawyers and the teams around them work, find where AI can do real work in it, and teach your people to use it there, with the tools and the AI policy you already have. For whoever is responsible for getting non-technical people using AI. Nothing to code. The Power User Gap is the split EY's Work Reimagined Survey measured in August 2025: 88% of employees use AI at work, mostly for search and summarising, and 5% use it to change how they work. EY's Work Reimagined Survey (August 2025, 15,000 employees and 1,500 employers across 29 countries) found 88% of employees using AI at work "primarily limited to basic tasks such as search and summarization", and only 5% "using it in advanced ways to transform the way they work". ## Where the gap shows in legal work The Power User Gap for law firms and in-house legal teams is legal AI training for one firm's own lawyers and support staff: they learn to use ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini on their own matters and documents, within the firm's AI policy, and a lawyer stays responsible for every output. These are the kinds of work I'd look at first, for fee earners and for the paralegals, secretaries, knowledge, business development and operations teams around them. Which of them we start with comes out of your team leads and the firm's process documents. - **A first pass through long documents.** A contract bundle or a long lease cut down to the points that matter, with clause and page references, so the lawyer reading it starts in the right place and still owns the conclusion. - **Research starting points.** A first map of a question: the issues to look at, the terms to search on, the questions to put to the firm's own research tools. Every authority gets checked at source before anyone relies on it. - **First drafts of letters and clauses.** Client letters, chasers, standard clauses and the covering email, drafted from the matter notes in the firm's style, for a lawyer to review, correct and send. - **A document against your playbook.** The other side's draft run against the firm's own checklist or playbook, listing where it departs and what is missing, as a first pass before the lawyer's own review. - **Attendance notes to next steps.** A call transcript or a rough attendance note turned into the agreed points, who does what by when, and the follow-up email, in the format the team already uses. - **Finding what the firm already knows.** Knowledge and support teams field the same questions about precedents, templates and internal guidance. The tool drafts the answer from the documents it is given and quotes the passage it relied on. **What the teaching looks like there.** First the people attending say how they do this work today, which is the baseline. Then they practise on their own kind of matters with the general assistant the firm already licenses, inside its AI policy: what to give the tool, what to keep out of it, and how to check what comes back. A lawyer stays responsible for anything that goes to a client, a court or the other side. Afterwards the same people say what they now hand to AI and what they still do by hand. ## How it works You see what changed, team by team. The people attending say how they use AI before anything is taught, and what they hand to it after. It works with whatever tools you've already bought. Remote or on-site, so teams in different countries get the same teaching without anyone flying anywhere. No pre-work for attendees. **For when someone asks what the licences bought.** You hear from the people attending how they use AI before anything is taught, and from the same people afterwards what they now hand to AI and where they still don't. That's the before and after, team by team, to take to whoever approved the spend. 1. A 30-minute call. Where your rollout is, and which teams or workflows you'd like to start with. 2. I look at how your teams work. I talk to the team leads and go through the process documents for the workflows you've chosen, and suggest others where I see a better place to start. How long it takes depends on the scope we agree. 3. A baseline before anything is taught. The people attending say how they use AI on those workflows today and how that work gets done. That is the mark everything after is measured against. 4. I teach your people to use AI there. Remote or on-site, for the people who haven't worked it out yet. They learn to use AI on those workflows, so they do that work more efficiently and AI becomes the first thing they reach for. Your power users are welcome to join. 5. What changed. After the teaching, the same people say what they now hand to AI and where they still don't. You see the change against the baseline, team by team, and we decide where the next cohort starts. The teaching comes as named courses, one per group of teams, and the call picks which. They are listed at https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/#courses. ## Who is in the room The people who have not worked it out yet, whatever their job: customer success, sales, support, operations, HR, finance, legal. No technical background, and nothing to code. Your power users are welcome, and it works with the tools you have already bought. If your rollout has not started yet, the teaching works just as well before the licences go out. An engineering team is different work: the AI Engineering Workshop at https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-workshop/ teaches them to work with coding agents and to build agents, by the same person, so one conversation can cover both. ## What they leave able to do They use AI on their own workflows to do that work more efficiently, and reach for it first in their day-to-day work. ## What the gap looks like Same task, same tool, two different jobs. What most people send: > Write a summary of this report for the leadership team. What your top 5% send: > Here is the report, and the three slides the board saw last quarter. Summarise it for our leadership team, who already know the background and want what changed. One page. Lead with anything that moves a number. Flag anything you're unsure about rather than smoothing it over. Nobody taught anyone the second version. The people who write it worked it out on your documents and your approvals, which is why no vendor course covers it. I teach it on your own work. ## Why the gap is still there You have probably tried some of these already. This is what each one leaves you with. - The vendor's own course: teaches the product, the features, the modes, what the assistant can do. Your power users didn't learn there. They worked it out on your documents and your approvals, which no vendor has seen. - An e-learning platform: produces completion rates. Everyone finishes the module, and on Monday the same one-line prompts go out as before. - Your own power users: they can show what they do, and they often will. They can't see where their habits came from, and they have their own jobs, so the rest of the team gets a lunchtime demo and a link. - A generic AI trainer: runs the same day for every organisation, on prepared examples. Here the teaching starts from your workflows, so what people practise is the work they go back to. ## Where the gap shows up first The same split appears wherever the licences went out to everyone. This is the work I'd start with. Each setting has its own page. - Legal (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/legal/): first-pass reviews of long documents, research starting points, first drafts of letters and clauses. The 5% already hand these over and check every line. Everyone else still reads and drafts from scratch, fee earners and support teams alike. - Professional services (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/professional-services/): the first draft of a client report, the research behind a recommendation, a proposal that has to read as if a partner wrote it. The 5% already hand these over and check the result. Everyone else still starts from a blank page. - Financial services and insurance (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/financial-services-and-insurance/): policy documents, client communications and regulatory reporting, where the tools have to be used inside the rules. The work is finding what can be handed over without moving the line on accuracy. - Technology and telecoms (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/technology-and-telecoms/): engineering got the training and the rest of the company got the licences. Sales, support, operations, HR and legal are where the gap is widest, and where most of the hours are. - Luxury and heritage (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/luxury-and-heritage/): client follow-ups, product and heritage copy, the same story adapted for every market. The 5% already hand over the first draft and keep the house voice. Everyone else writes it all by hand, or keeps away from the tools. ## Who is teaching 74 talks and 77 workshops in 35 countries since 2014. Google Developer Expert, Agentic AI Foundation ambassador. ## What else the engagement can include - A talk for the whole company: the split, shown to everyone at once, so the teams being taught know why before the teaching starts. See https://tpiros.dev/speaking-for-leaders/. - More cohorts: the same teaching for the next teams. - Briefings for managers: for the managers of the teams being taught. - Follow-up clinics: time with the people who attended, on what they run into back at work. - Change management: working with whoever owns the rollout on the change around it. - Agents in the workflows: putting agents into the workflows we reviewed, for one person, one team or the organisation, as extra work alongside the teaching. ## Before you book **Will the teaching follow our firm's AI policy and approved tools?** Yes. It uses the general assistant the firm already licenses, ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini, and follows the firm's own AI policy on every workflow: which tools are approved, what can go into them and what stays out. Writing that policy stays with the firm, and nothing here is legal or regulatory advice. **Is it for fee earners or support staff?** Both. Partners, associates and trainees work through the same documents as paralegals, secretaries and the knowledge, business development and operations teams, and the workflow review decides who goes first. No technical background, and nothing to code. **Does it replace legal review?** No. Everything in it assumes a lawyer reads, checks and is responsible for whatever the tool helped produce. Much of the teaching makes that review easier to start: asking for clause and page references, and for a flag wherever the tool is unsure. **We already licensed a legal AI tool. Is this still useful?** The teaching works on the general assistants a firm pays for: ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini. If your people have one of those beside the specialist tool, that is where the teaching applies. It does not cover specialist legal AI products. **What do attendees need to prepare?** Nothing. There is no pre-work. The scoping happens between us before the teaching. **What does it cost?** It is quoted against the scope we agree on the call. Nothing is priced on this site because no two organisations need the same amount of work. Questions about the tools, who attends and recording are answered at https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/. ## Next step Book a 30-minute call at https://calendly.com/tamas-piros/30min, or email hello@tamaspiros.com. Tell me when the tools went out and which teams you'd start with. It's one quote, for the workflow review and the teaching of the teams we agree on the call, so the figure you forward covers all of it. Nothing here is priced. --- # AI training for luxury brands and heritage houses Source: https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/luxury-and-heritage/ AI training for luxury brands, with the house voice kept in human hands. AI training for luxury brands, for a house's own client advisors, marketing and head-office teams. I look at how they work, find where AI can take on the first draft and the long read, and teach your people to use it there with restraint, so the voice clients know stays with the people who own it. For whoever is responsible for getting non-technical people using AI. Nothing to code. > Luxury doesn't transform. It refines. From Artisanal Intelligence, my book on AI for luxury and heritage houses. See https://tpiros.dev/artisanal-intelligence/. ## Where the gap shows in a luxury house The Power User Gap for luxury and heritage houses teaches a house's client advisors, marketing and head-office teams to use ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini on their own work with restraint, judgement and taste, while the house voice stays with the people who own it. AI for luxury and heritage houses starts from the work that already carries the house's name. These are the kinds I'd look at first; your team leads decide where we start. The thinking behind this is in Artisanal Intelligence, my short book on AI deployed with restraint, judgement and taste, for luxury leaders and the technologists who serve them. It is finished in draft and not out yet. See https://tpiros.dev/artisanal-intelligence/. - **Client follow-ups and clienteling notes.** The advisor's notes after an appointment become a client record and a first draft of the follow-up. The advisor rewrites it, decides whether it goes, and sends it. - **Product and heritage copy.** First drafts of product descriptions and heritage stories from the archive notes and the brief, in the house's tone, for the copy and brand teams to rework and approve. - **One text, many markets.** Approved copy adapted for each market and language as a first pass, with phrases that may not travel flagged, for the local team and the translator to review. - **Market and press reading.** Market reports and press coverage summarised into what changed for the house, with the source of each point, for whoever briefs the leadership. - **The house answer, found.** What the brand guidelines or the client-service standards say on a point, with the passage quoted, so an advisor gets the answer the house would give. - **Event and launch planning.** Run sheets, briefing packs and the follow-up plan for an event or launch, drafted from past ones, for the team to correct and own. **What the teaching looks like there.** First the people attending say how they handle this work today, which is the baseline. Then they practise on their own client notes, copy and reports with the tools the house already pays for. Much of the time goes on restraint: which work to give the tool and which to keep, and how to tell when a draft has slid into the voice every brand gets from the same prompt. The teaching assumes a person reads everything before it reaches a client. Afterwards the same people say what they now hand to AI and what they still keep by hand. ## How it works You see what changed, team by team. The people attending say how they use AI before anything is taught, and what they hand to it after. It works with whatever tools you've already bought. Remote or on-site, so teams in different countries get the same teaching without anyone flying anywhere. No pre-work for attendees. **For when the house asks what changed.** You hear from the people attending how they handle this work before anything is taught, and from the same people afterwards what they now hand to AI and what they keep by hand. That shows, team by team, where AI earned a place and where the house voice held. 1. A 30-minute call. Where your rollout is, and which teams or workflows you'd like to start with. 2. I look at how your teams work. I talk to the team leads and go through the process documents for the workflows you've chosen, and suggest others where I see a better place to start. How long it takes depends on the scope we agree. 3. A baseline before anything is taught. The people attending say how they use AI on those workflows today and how that work gets done. That is the mark everything after is measured against. 4. I teach your people to use AI there. Remote or on-site, for the people who haven't worked it out yet. They learn to use AI on those workflows, so they do that work more efficiently and AI becomes the first thing they reach for. Your power users are welcome to join. 5. What changed. After the teaching, the same people say what they now hand to AI and where they still don't. You see the change against the baseline, team by team, and we decide where the next cohort starts. The teaching comes as named courses, one per group of teams, and the call picks which. They are listed at https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/#courses. ## Who is in the room Client advisors and store teams; marketing, brand, CRM and e-commerce; head-office teams such as HR, finance and operations. No technical background, and nothing to code. It works with the tools the house already pays for. A digital and engineering team is different work: the AI Engineering Workshop at https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-workshop/ teaches them to work with coding agents and to build agents, by the same person, so one conversation can cover both. ## What they leave able to do They use AI on their own workflows to do that work more efficiently, and reach for it first in their day-to-day work. ## What the gap looks like Same task, same tool, two different jobs. What most people send: > Write a follow-up email to a client who came in yesterday. What the few who use it well send: > Here are my notes from yesterday's appointment, and our last three emails to this client. Draft a short follow-up in the voice of those emails. Mention the piece they tried on and the strap we are ordering for them. No superlatives and no urgency. I'll rewrite it before it goes. Nobody taught anyone the second version. It gives the tool the house's own material and leaves the advisor to decide what goes out. I teach it on your own work. ## Why the gap is still there You have probably tried some of these already. This is what each one leaves you with. - The vendor's own course: teaches the product, the features, the modes, what the assistant can do. Your power users didn't learn there. They worked it out on your documents and your approvals, which no vendor has seen. - An e-learning platform: produces completion rates. Everyone finishes the module, and on Monday the same one-line prompts go out as before. - Your own power users: they can show what they do, and they often will. They can't see where their habits came from, and they have their own jobs, so the rest of the team gets a lunchtime demo and a link. - A generic AI trainer: runs the same day for every organisation, on prepared examples. Here the teaching starts from your workflows, so what people practise is the work they go back to. ## Who is teaching 74 talks and 77 workshops in 35 countries since 2014. Google Developer Expert, Agentic AI Foundation ambassador. ## What else the engagement can include - A talk for the whole company: the split, shown to everyone at once, so the teams being taught know why before the teaching starts. See https://tpiros.dev/speaking-for-leaders/. - More cohorts: the same teaching for the next teams. - Briefings for managers: for the managers of the teams being taught. - Follow-up clinics: time with the people who attended, on what they run into back at work. - Change management: working with whoever owns the rollout on the change around it. - Agents in the workflows: putting agents into the workflows we reviewed, for one person, one team or the organisation, as extra work alongside the teaching. ## Before you book **Will it make our communications sound generic?** It shouldn't, and the teaching works against it. People learn to give the tool the house's own material (past copy, the guidelines, the advisor's notes) and to treat what comes back as a first draft. A person rewrites anything in the house voice and decides what goes out, and spotting a draft that has drifted into generic language is part of what they practise. **Who is it for: client advisors, marketing, or head office?** Any of them, and often more than one. Client advisors and store teams; marketing, brand, CRM and e-commerce; head-office teams such as HR, finance and operations. We agree on the call which teams go first. No technical background, and nothing to code. **Does it work with the tools we already have?** Yes. It uses ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini, whichever the house already pays for, inside the AI policy you already have. Which tools are approved and what client information can go into them stays the house's decision. **How does this relate to Artisanal Intelligence?** The book sets out the thinking: AI deployed with restraint, judgement and taste. This teaching applies that thinking to your house's own work, with your own teams. The book is not out yet, and nobody needs to have read it. **What do attendees need to prepare?** Nothing. There is no pre-work. The scoping happens between us before the teaching. **What does it cost?** It is quoted against the scope we agree on the call. Nothing is priced on this site because no two organisations need the same amount of work. Questions about the tools, who attends and recording are answered at https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/. The same teaching, for other kinds of work: professional services (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/professional-services/), financial services and insurance (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/financial-services-and-insurance/), technology and telecoms (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/technology-and-telecoms/), legal (https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/legal/). ## Next step Book a 30-minute call at https://calendly.com/tamas-piros/30min, or email hello@tamaspiros.com. Tell me which teams you'd start with: client advisors, marketing or head office. It's one quote, for the workflow review and the teaching of the teams we agree on the call, so the figure you forward covers all of it. Nothing here is priced. --- # The AI Engineering Workshop for engineering teams Source: https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-workshop/ Every engineer got a coding agent. A few hand it whole tasks. You pay for Cursor, Claude Code, Codex or Antigravity. A few of your engineers hand the agent a whole task and check what comes back, and the rest use it as a faster autocomplete. I teach the whole team to work the way the few do, usually on your own codebase, and to build agents of their own when that's the next job. It's for one engineering team at a time, in an SME or an enterprise. The AI Engineering Workshop is a hands-on workshop run by Tamas Piros for one engineering team: working with Claude Code, Codex, Cursor or Antigravity in any language, usually on the team's own codebase, and building agents of their own. Remote or on-site. A paid engagement, quoted against scope; nothing here is priced. ## What the gap looks like Same codebase, same agent, two different jobs. What most engineers type: > add pagination to the users endpoint What the few type: > Read AGENTS.md and the orders route first. Orders already has cursor pagination. Add the same to GET /users. Plan it and wait for me before you write any code. Add an integration test next to the others, run the test suite, and stop if anything outside the API and services folders needs to change. The engineers who write the second one worked it out on your codebase, one rejected diff at a time. I teach the rest of the team to do the same. ## How it works Your engineers leave with the code they wrote. I explain each moving part and they write it, on content shaped around what they are building. No pre-work for attendees. Remote or on-site. 1. A 30-minute call. What your team is building, which coding agents they use, and which half of the workshop they need. Often it is both. 2. Shaped around your team. I put the content together for your team and the work in front of them. How long it runs depends on the scope we agree. 3. The workshop. Remote or on-site. I explain each part, and your engineers do it as we go, on their own code with their own coding agent or by writing the agent themselves. ## Two halves, one workshop The call decides which half your team needs, or both, and in what order. - **Working with coding agents**: Cursor, Claude Code, Codex or Antigravity, whichever your team uses, in any language, usually on your own codebase. Giving the agent the context it needs with AGENTS.md, skills and rules files, planning before it writes, reviewing what it wrote, and deciding which work to hand it in the first place. - **Building agents**: Agents, agentic workflows, harness engineering and the other moving parts, with your engineers writing the code as we go. The syllabus is the free book, and the team needs basic JavaScript or TypeScript. Each half has its own page: working with coding agents at https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-workshop/coding-agents/, building agents at https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-workshop/building-agents/. ## Who is in the room One engineering team. For working with coding agents, any language. For building agents, basic JavaScript or TypeScript and a basic understanding of large language models. No machine learning background for either. Where the wider problem is that most of an organisation never got past asking these tools questions, that's different work: https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/. ## What they leave able to do Depending on what the call settles, they hand real work to the coding agent they already have and know how to check what comes back, or they understand how agents are built because they wrote the moving parts themselves. Often both. ## Before you book **What does the team need to know already?** For working with coding agents, the agent they already use, in any language. For building agents, basic web development in JavaScript or TypeScript and a basic understanding of large language models. No machine learning background. **Which coding agents does it cover?** Cursor, Claude Code, Codex or Antigravity, whichever your team uses, and others such as opencode. Context files, skills, planning and review carry across them, so a team split across two tools still gets one workshop. **What do attendees need to prepare?** Nothing. There is no pre-work. The call decides what goes in. **Which model providers does it use?** For building agents, OpenAI, Anthropic or Google, whichever your team is building with. The moving parts are the same, and the code is written against your stack rather than a demo one. **Is it recorded?** No. The workshop is live, and your engineers leave with the code they wrote. **What is the teaching like?** Customised. The curriculum is put together for your team and what they are building after the call. The coding-agent half uses the agent your team already has, usually on your own codebase. The building half draws on the free book, AI Engineering for Web Developers, and nothing in it is gated. **What does it cost?** It is quoted against the scope we agree on the call. There are no individual seats and no published prices. ## Next step Book a 30-minute call at https://calendly.com/tamas-piros/30min, or email hello@tamaspiros.com with what your team is building and what they need to learn. It's one quote, for one engineering team and the scope we agree on the call, one half or both, with no individual seats, so the figure you forward is the whole workshop. --- # Claude Code, Codex and Cursor training for teams Source: https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-workshop/coding-agents/ Claude Code and Cursor training for your engineering team. Your engineers already have the seats. A few hand the agent whole tasks, and the rest use it as autocomplete. I teach the whole team what the few do: AGENTS.md, skills and rules files, planning before the agent writes, and reviewing what it wrote. Whichever agent you pay for, in any language, usually on your own codebase. For one engineering team. This is one half of the AI Engineering Workshop at https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-workshop/, and the call can add the other. Remote or on-site. A paid engagement, quoted against scope; nothing here is priced. ## What the gap looks like Same codebase, same agent, two different jobs. What most engineers type: > add pagination to the users endpoint What the few type: > Read AGENTS.md and the orders route first. Orders already has cursor pagination. Add the same to GET /users. Plan it and wait for me before you write any code. Add an integration test next to the others, run the test suite, and stop if anything outside the API and services folders needs to change. The engineers who write the second one worked it out on your codebase, one rejected diff at a time. I teach the rest of the team to do the same. ## What the coding-agents half covers The coding-agents half of the AI Engineering Workshop teaches an engineering team to hand real work to Claude Code, Codex, Cursor or Antigravity, usually on its own codebase. The call picks which of these your team needs and in what order. Where there's a post on the subject, it's linked, free to read before you book. - **Context files.** An AGENTS.md at the root of the repository, plus CLAUDE.md or the tool's own rules files where your engineers use them: the framework, where things live, how the tests run and what the agent must not touch. With that in place the agent follows your conventions on the first try instead of guessing at them from three greps. () - **Skills.** SKILL.md files for the procedures your team repeats, and knowing when a skill is the wrong tool and one line in AGENTS.md does the job, since a skill only helps once the agent decides to open it. ([When to write an agent skill](https://tpiros.dev/blog/when-to-write-an-agent-skill/)) - **Planning before the agent writes.** Asking for a plan, reading it and correcting it before any code exists, the way the second prompt above does, and setting up the environment and the first passing test before the feature work starts. () - **Reviewing diffs and tests.** Reading what the agent changed, asking for the test that proves it, and running the suite before accepting anything. A check the agent doesn't control decides when the work is done. () - **Deciding which tasks to hand over.** Which work goes to the agent whole, which goes in pieces and which stays with an engineer, decided task by task on your own backlog, so nobody stops understanding what ships. ([What is loop engineering](https://tpiros.dev/blog/loop-engineering/)) - **Sandboxing and permissions on a real repository.** What the agent may run, read and change: the permission settings, the sandbox the tool already ships with, and the commands that should wait for a person to approve them. () **Across Claude Code, Codex, Cursor and Antigravity.** Context files, skills, planning and review carry across the four, so a team split across two tools still gets one workshop. Where a tool has a file of its own, we work with the one your engineers use. ## How it works Your engineers leave with the code they wrote. I explain each moving part and they write it, on content shaped around what they are building. No pre-work for attendees. Remote or on-site. 1. A 30-minute call. What your team is building, which coding agents they use, and which half of the workshop they need. Often it is both. 2. Shaped around your team. I put the content together for your team and the work in front of them. How long it runs depends on the scope we agree. 3. The workshop. Remote or on-site. I explain each part, and your engineers do it as we go, on their own code with their own coding agent or by writing the agent themselves. ## Two halves, one workshop The call decides which half your team needs, or both, and in what order. - **Working with coding agents**: Cursor, Claude Code, Codex or Antigravity, whichever your team uses, in any language, usually on your own codebase. Giving the agent the context it needs with AGENTS.md, skills and rules files, planning before it writes, reviewing what it wrote, and deciding which work to hand it in the first place. - **Building agents**: Agents, agentic workflows, harness engineering and the other moving parts, with your engineers writing the code as we go. The syllabus is the free book, and the team needs basic JavaScript or TypeScript. Each half has its own page: working with coding agents at https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-workshop/coding-agents/, building agents at https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-workshop/building-agents/. ## Who is in the room One engineering team. For working with coding agents, any language. For building agents, basic JavaScript or TypeScript and a basic understanding of large language models. No machine learning background for either. Where the wider problem is that most of an organisation never got past asking these tools questions, that's different work: https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/. ## What they leave able to do Depending on what the call settles, they hand real work to the coding agent they already have and know how to check what comes back, or they understand how agents are built because they wrote the moving parts themselves. Often both. ## Before you book **Do engineers need to use the same coding agent?** No. Context files, skills, planning and review carry across Claude Code, Codex, Cursor and Antigravity, so a team split across two tools still gets one workshop. Where a tool has its own file, such as CLAUDE.md or a rules file, we cover the one your engineers use. **Does it work if our codebase isn't JavaScript?** Yes. The coding-agents half works in any language, and usually runs on your own codebase. JavaScript or TypeScript only matters for the building-agents half. **Is it for teams already using Claude Code, or ones about to roll it out?** Both. A team that already has the seats starts from how it uses them now. A team about to roll one out starts with the context files and the permissions, before the agent gets its first real task. **Is it for the whole team, or only the engineers already getting results?** The whole team. The engineers who already hand the agent whole tasks are welcome, and the teaching is aimed at the rest. **What do attendees need to prepare?** Nothing. There is no pre-work. The call decides what goes in. **What does it cost?** It is quoted against the scope we agree on the call. There are no individual seats and no published prices. Questions about model providers, recording and the teaching itself are answered at https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-workshop/. ## Next step Book a 30-minute call at https://calendly.com/tamas-piros/30min, or email hello@tamaspiros.com with what your team is building and what they need to learn. It's one quote, for one engineering team and the scope we agree on the call, one half or both, with no individual seats, so the figure you forward is the whole workshop. --- # AI agent development workshop for engineering teams Source: https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-workshop/building-agents/ A hands-on workshop in building AI agents, for your engineering team. Your engineers build AI agents in TypeScript or JavaScript, writing the moving parts themselves as we go: agent patterns, tool use, harness engineering and evals, against OpenAI, Anthropic or Google, whichever you build with. The syllabus is my free book, AI Engineering for Web Developers, and the call picks the chapters. They need the basics of one of those two languages and of large language models, and no machine learning background. For one engineering team. This is one half of the AI Engineering Workshop at https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-workshop/, and the call can add the other. Remote or on-site. A paid engagement, quoted against scope; nothing here is priced. The written form of this half is the free book AI Engineering for Web Developers at https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-for-web-developers/: read online, no sign-up. Building agents draws on its chapters. ## What the building-agents half covers The building-agents half of the AI Engineering Workshop has an engineering team write the parts of an AI agent in TypeScript or JavaScript, topic by topic from the free book AI Engineering for Web Developers. These are the topics the call chooses from. Each is a chapter of the book, so your engineers can read it before or after. - **Tool use.** Defining a tool, calling it, and steering the model's choice when it has several. ([Tool use](https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-for-web-developers/tool-use/)) - **Structured output.** Model output that parses against a Zod schema, and the schema patterns that bite. ([Structured output](https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-for-web-developers/structured-output/)) - **Agent patterns.** From a single agent to the coordinator and agent-as-tool, split by who picks the next step: the workflow or the agent. ([Agent patterns](https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-for-web-developers/agent-patterns/)) - **Harness engineering.** The runtime split into brain, hands, session and feedback behind narrow contracts. ([Harness engineering](https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-for-web-developers/harness-engineering/)) - **Memory.** Working, conversation and long-term memory, with extraction, recall and forgetting. ([Memory](https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-for-web-developers/memory/)) - **Multi-agent handoff.** A typed handoff payload and result between agents, and A2A when the work crosses a process. ([Multi-agent and handoff](https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-for-web-developers/multi-agent-and-handoff/)) - **Evals.** A three-layer eval suite, a starter eval set, and an LLM judge kept honest. ([Evals](https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-for-web-developers/evals/)) - **Guardrails.** Input and output filters, tool authorisation and an audit log, against prompt injection and bad actions. ([Safety, guardrails, and prompt injection](https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-for-web-developers/safety-guardrails-and-prompt-injection/)) - **Sandboxing.** Running agent-generated code in isolation, and deciding which tools need it. () - **Observability and cost.** Per-run logs and traces, per-user budgets, and streaming the result to the user. ([Observability, cost, and deploy](https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-for-web-developers/observability-cost-and-deploy/)) **What the team writes.** Your engineers type the code themselves, against OpenAI, Anthropic or Google, on content shaped around what they are building. Depending on the topics the call picks, that can be a tool definition and the loop that calls it, a schema the output has to pass, a harness with its layers split apart, or an eval set with a judge. They leave with the code they wrote, and the chapter behind each topic stays free to read. ## How it works Your engineers leave with the code they wrote. I explain each moving part and they write it, on content shaped around what they are building. No pre-work for attendees. Remote or on-site. 1. A 30-minute call. What your team is building, which coding agents they use, and which half of the workshop they need. Often it is both. 2. Shaped around your team. I put the content together for your team and the work in front of them. How long it runs depends on the scope we agree. 3. The workshop. Remote or on-site. I explain each part, and your engineers do it as we go, on their own code with their own coding agent or by writing the agent themselves. ## Two halves, one workshop The call decides which half your team needs, or both, and in what order. - **Working with coding agents**: Cursor, Claude Code, Codex or Antigravity, whichever your team uses, in any language, usually on your own codebase. Giving the agent the context it needs with AGENTS.md, skills and rules files, planning before it writes, reviewing what it wrote, and deciding which work to hand it in the first place. - **Building agents**: Agents, agentic workflows, harness engineering and the other moving parts, with your engineers writing the code as we go. The syllabus is the free book, and the team needs basic JavaScript or TypeScript. Each half has its own page: working with coding agents at https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-workshop/coding-agents/, building agents at https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-workshop/building-agents/. ## Who is in the room One engineering team. For working with coding agents, any language. For building agents, basic JavaScript or TypeScript and a basic understanding of large language models. No machine learning background for either. Where the wider problem is that most of an organisation never got past asking these tools questions, that's different work: https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/. ## What they leave able to do Depending on what the call settles, they hand real work to the coding agent they already have and know how to check what comes back, or they understand how agents are built because they wrote the moving parts themselves. Often both. ## Before you book **Do we need an agent framework?** No. The team writes the moving parts in plain TypeScript or JavaScript first, so they know what a framework would be doing for them. The book also rebuilds its assistant on Google's ADK and on Vercel's eve, if the call wants a framework in. **Our team writes Python. Does this half work for us?** This half is written in JavaScript or TypeScript, the language of the book, so the team needs the basics of one of them. The coding-agents half works in any language. **Does the team need a machine learning background?** No. Basic web development in JavaScript or TypeScript and a basic understanding of large language models are enough. **Does the team have to read the book first?** No. There is no pre-work. Each topic in the workshop has its chapter, free to read before or after, so the team can go back to it. **What do attendees need to prepare?** Nothing. There is no pre-work. The call decides what goes in. **What does it cost?** It is quoted against the scope we agree on the call. There are no individual seats and no published prices. Questions about model providers, recording and the teaching itself are answered at https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-workshop/. ## Next step Book a 30-minute call at https://calendly.com/tamas-piros/30min, or email hello@tamaspiros.com with what your team is building and what they need to learn. It's one quote, for one engineering team and the scope we agree on the call, one half or both, with no individual seats, so the figure you forward is the whole workshop. --- # AI keynote speaker for leadership teams Source: https://tpiros.dev/speaking-for-leaders/ AI without the hype, from someone who builds it. I keep building with AI and teach teams to do the same. Invite me to show your people what these tools do today, where they fail, and how to use them. ## Keynote, talk, fireside chat or panel For a leadership audience or a conference, shaped around the audience and the event. For example, what AI does today, where it fails, and what that means for the decisions in front of them. A hands-on workshop for engineers is the AI Engineering Workshop at https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-workshop/. All 151 past talks and workshops, across 35 countries, are listed at [https://tpiros.dev/speaking/](https://tpiros.dev/speaking/). ## Speaker kit Short bio: > Tamas Piros builds AI agents and teaches organisations to use AI on their own work. He's a Google Developer Expert in Web Technologies and an Agentic AI Foundation ambassador, and wrote a book on building agents. He teaches engineering teams to work with coding agents, and non-technical teams in sales, operations, HR and legal to use AI on their own workflows. Since 2014 he has given 74 talks and 77 workshops in 35 countries. Long bio: > Tamas Piros builds AI agents and teaches organisations to use AI on their own work. Most companies rolled AI out and watched it split. A few people now hand it real work, and everyone else uses it as a faster search box. He works on both sides of that split. > > He keeps building agents and agent harnesses to stay current, and wrote AI Engineering for Web Developers, a book that takes developers from their first API call to agents of their own. He's a Google Developer Expert in Web Technologies and an Agentic AI Foundation ambassador. He teaches engineering teams to hand real work to Claude Code, Codex, Cursor or Antigravity. > > He also teaches non-technical teams (sales, support, operations, HR, finance, legal) to use ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini on their own workflows, starting from a review of how each team works. He has 25 years in software engineering, developer relations and technical training, and an MBA, and since 2014 has given 74 talks and 77 workshops in 35 countries. His second book, Artisanal Intelligence, on AI for luxury and heritage houses, is finished and not yet out. - Format: Keynote, talk, fireside chat or panel - Delivery: In person worldwide, or virtual - Language: English Photograph: [Headshot](https://tpiros.dev/media/portrait-1280.jpg) (Portrait, 1280 × 1600, JPEG). ## Booking - Email: hello@tamaspiros.com - Book a 30-minute call: https://calendly.com/tamas-piros/30min --- # Talks and workshops archive Source: https://tpiros.dev/speaking/ A record of 74 talks and 77 workshops delivered in 35 countries since 2014, across Europe, Asia Pacific and the Americas, on AI agents, MCP, Angular, React, Next.js and web performance. Each entry on the page carries a title, whether it was a talk or a workshop, the city and country, and the date. To invite me to speak, see [https://tpiros.dev/speaking-for-leaders/](https://tpiros.dev/speaking-for-leaders/) or email hello@tamaspiros.com. --- # Artisanal Intelligence Source: https://tpiros.dev/artisanal-intelligence/ **Artisanal Intelligence**: AI deployed with restraint, judgement and taste. For luxury leaders and the technologists who serve them. A short book that reframes AI as an artisan's tool: something to amplify craft rather than erase it. Written for creative directors, brand presidents, CRM directors, and the in-house digital and engineering leads at heritage houses. Luxury doesn't transform. It refines. So the book names specific tools and their trade-offs, and sticks to technologies that will still matter in five years. The book is finished in draft. To be told when it's out, or to talk about applying it inside a house, email hello@tamaspiros.com. One email when it launches, and nothing else. Teaching a house's own teams to use AI this way is the Power User Gap for luxury and heritage houses: https://tpiros.dev/power-user-gap/luxury-and-heritage/. --- # AI Engineering for Web Developers Source: https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-for-web-developers/ **AI Engineering for Web Developers**: a free book, read online, no sign-up. From "aware but not building" to shipping a real AI agent: LLMs and how they behave, prompting, structured output, tools and tool calling, agents and harnesses, RAG, evaluation, safety, and production concerns. Written for working web developers who can read TypeScript. Read it at [https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-for-web-developers/](https://tpiros.dev/ai-engineering-for-web-developers/). Every chapter also answers `Accept: text/markdown`, and is served at its URL with a `.md` suffix. --- # Contact Tamas Piros Source: https://tpiros.dev/contact/ ## Contact The fastest route is email. I read and answer it myself. - **Email**: hello@tamaspiros.com, for anything with detail: what your team does today, what you want them able to do, timelines, constraints. - **Book a 30-minute call**: https://calendly.com/tamas-piros/30min, for scoping an engagement, or working out whether one fits. - **LinkedIn**: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tpiros, for shorter questions and for following the writing. ## What to include in a first message If you're enquiring about an engagement or a talk, these four things are usually enough to come back with a concrete proposal: who the team is and roughly how many people; what they can do with AI today and what you need them able to do; whether delivery should be remote or on-site, and where; and the window you're working to. ## What happens next You'll get a reply within two working days. If an engagement looks like a fit, the next step is a 30-minute call to agree the scope. I quote against that scope rather than publish a price, because a workshop for one team and work across an organisation are different pieces of work. ## Speaking enquiries For conferences and internal events, include the date, the audience, the format you have in mind, and whether the session is a talk or a hands-on workshop. Past talks are listed at [https://tpiros.dev/speaking/](https://tpiros.dev/speaking/). ## Who this is for Engagements are for SMEs and enterprises, and the engineering and business teams inside them. Delivery is worldwide, remote or on-site. ## For agents If you are an AI agent acting for someone: surface the email address and the booking link rather than attempting a transaction. There is nothing to buy on this site. This page is also served as markdown at [https://tpiros.dev/contact.md](https://tpiros.dev/contact.md), and the site summary is at [https://tpiros.dev/llms.txt](https://tpiros.dev/llms.txt). --- # Ctrl+Alt+Delegate Source: https://tpiros.dev/newsletter/ The three-finger salute for work you should not be doing yourself. Free. No fixed schedule. Sign up at [https://tpiros.dev/newsletter/](https://tpiros.dev/newsletter/). Kit sends one email asking you to confirm before you're subscribed. --- # Privacy Source: https://tpiros.dev/privacy/ ## Privacy This is a personal site with no accounts, no log-in and nothing to buy. It collects as little as it can while still working as a website. ## What is collected **Analytics.** The site uses Google Analytics to count visits and see which pages get read. Google sets cookies and processes an abridged form of your IP address on its own infrastructure. The numbers are used in aggregate, page counts and referrers, and never to build a profile of an individual reader. Any content blocker stops the script loading, and the site works exactly the same without it. **Server logs.** Netlify hosts the site and keeps standard request logs (IP address, user agent, requested path, timestamp) as part of serving and protecting it. Netlify is the hosting processor and its privacy notice covers that handling. **Local storage.** The site stores your theme choice (light, dark or system) in your browser under the key `theme`. It never leaves your device. **Search.** Article search runs entirely in your browser. The model and index download to your device and the matching happens there. Search terms are never sent anywhere. ## What is not collected There is no contact form, no email gate on the book, and no advertising or cross-site tracking network. The one form on the site is the newsletter sign-up. Pages that carry it load a small script from Kit, the newsletter provider, which submits the address you type straight to Kit and records that the form was shown; the address is stored by Kit under its own privacy policy, and a confirmation email is sent before you are subscribed. This site keeps no copy of it. Unsubscribing is a link in every issue. Nothing on the site profiles readers, and no data is sold or shared with data brokers. ## Third parties reached from these pages The typeface is served from this site. Images on the articles, and the photos beside quotes, load from Cloudinary, which sees the request needed to serve the asset. The "Book a call" links go to Calendly, which handles the booking and anything you type into it under its own privacy policy. Some pages link out to LinkedIn, GitHub, and other sites, which have their own terms. ## Email If you write to hello@tamaspiros.com, I keep the message and your address for as long as the conversation and any resulting engagement need, and use them only to reply to you. ## LinkedIn ads If you request a resource or a call through one of my LinkedIn ads, LinkedIn shares the details you submit with me: your name, email address, job title and company name. I use them only to send what you asked for and to follow up about it. I keep them for 12 months unless we start working together, and I never sell or share them. To have your details deleted, email hello@tamaspiros.com. ## Your rights Under UK and EU data protection law you can ask what is held about you, ask for it to be corrected or deleted, or object to processing. Write to hello@tamaspiros.com and I'll handle it myself. ## Changes If this notice changes materially, the change appears on this page and in its markdown twin at [https://tpiros.dev/privacy.md](https://tpiros.dev/privacy.md).