Why the usual AI training doesn't stick
I've sat through the version most agencies and consultants sell. Somebody shows twenty slides about how to write a better prompt, everyone nods, and a week later the team is back to the same Canva files and the same Monday spreadsheet. The training taught tools. It didn't change any job.
The reason is simple. AI only helps a marketing team when it sits inside a piece of work the team already does every week, with a person who owns the output and knows what good looks like. Creative production and reporting are the two jobs where that's most true, and where the payoff shows up fastest. So that's where I start.
What I actually do
I come in for a defined program rather than an open-ended retainer, and it runs in three parts.
Diagnose. Two to four weeks. I sit with the people who make the ads and the people who make the reports and watch how the work happens now, including the parts nobody thinks are worth mentioning. I score where you are on a simple maturity scale, find the two or three jobs where AI would save the most hours or produce the most tests, and ship a couple of quick wins during the audit so nobody has to wait for a deck to see value.
Build. A couple of months. We build the workflows together, in your accounts and tools, with your team's hands on the keyboard. On the creative side that usually means an angle-generation loop, a persona test before anything gets produced, and an AI-assisted production path that turns a winning angle into finished statics and video. I use Higgsfield for generation and CapCut to finish, and I'll teach your team that same stack or whatever fits your brand. On the reporting side it means a dashboard that opens with what to do this week instead of a wall of charts, built so your team can regenerate it themselves.
Coach. A small monthly retainer after that. Office hours, a short note each month on what changed in AI that actually matters for your work, and updates to the playbooks as the tools move. This is the part that keeps the new habits from fading, and it's deliberately light.
The maturity scale I use
It's not fancy, but it makes the conversation concrete.
| Level | What it looks like | What I'd do first |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | Individuals use ChatGPT on the side; nothing is shared | Pick one job, make one shared workflow, prove it |
| 1 | Shared prompts and a few AI tools in use, no ownership | Assign owners, put the prompts where the work happens |
| 2 | Real workflows with a human reviewing each output | Connect the workflows to your data and reporting |
| 3 | The team extends the workflows themselves | Governance, cost control, and I get out of the way |
Most growth-stage DTC brands I meet are between 1 and 2. That's a good place to be, because the jump to 3 is mostly about ownership and repetition, not about buying software.
What it looked like for a couple of teams
An oral-care DTC brand had shared prompts, a handful of AI tools and a Slack-fed changelog, and a marketing leader who knew there was more in it. We ran the program as an audit with quick wins, two months of building the creative and reporting workflows, and a light coaching retainer after. The point wasn't the tools. It was that her team could run the loop on a Tuesday without me on the call.
A St. Louis creative agency asked for a half day on paid media for their partners and a new paid media manager. The most useful hour turned out to be the one on AI: the Higgsfield to CapCut creative path and how I use Claude to spin up a client dashboard in an afternoon. They walked out with a workflow, not a reading list.
Who this fits
Marketing teams of two to ten at DTC and e-commerce brands, usually $5M to $80M, with a leader who wants the team to get faster and doesn't want to hire an "AI person" to do it for them. It also fits agencies that want their own team to be able to do this for clients.
It's a poor fit if you want a keynote, or if nobody on the team owns creative or reporting today. Training an empty seat doesn't work.
What it costs
Inside any of my seats, this is just part of the job. As a standalone program it's scoped as the three parts above: a one-time audit, a couple of months of building, then a small monthly coaching retainer. Ask and I'll give you the number on the first call. Software stays in your accounts, and I'll push for the cheapest tool that does the job.
Questions people ask
What's the difference between AI training and what you do?
Training teaches tools in a room. I change how two specific jobs get done, creative and reporting, by building the workflows with your team inside their real work and coaching them until they run it alone.
Which AI tools do you train marketing teams on?
Whatever fits the job. For ad creative I mostly use Higgsfield to generate and CapCut to finish. For reporting and workflow tooling I use Claude. I'll teach your team those, or the tools you already pay for if they're good enough.
How long does it take to see results?
Quick wins ship during the audit, in the first two to four weeks. The workflows are usually running on their own by the end of month three.
Do you do this for agencies as well as brands?
Yes. Agencies want their own teams to produce more creative tests and clearer client reporting, and the same workflows apply. I've run it as a workshop and as a longer program.
Do we need to buy new software?
Usually not much. Most teams already pay for one AI tool and use ten percent of it. The gap is ownership and workflow, not licences.
Can you just come do a workshop?
I can, and I'll be honest that a single session moves knowledge more than behavior. If a workshop is the budget, I'll design it so people leave with one workflow installed, not a list of tips.