Skip to content

AI Act Briefing

Half a day, and the guessing stops.

A working session with the people who will actually have to decide things. What the AI Act asks of an organisation like yours, what already applies today, and a first pass at classifying what you have running.

The problem

Most of what you have read about the AI Act does not apply to you.

The regulation is long, staged across several years, and written for everyone from model developers down to the businesses that merely use the output. Most coverage collapses that into one deadline and one obligation, which is why leadership teams arrive either complacent or alarmed and almost never correctly calibrated.

Half a day with the right people in the room settles it. Not a presentation with a Q and A at the end. A working session that finishes with your own systems provisionally classified and a position you can circulate the same week.

What you get

A

The session

Half a day, remote, with the people who can decide. Structured around your systems rather than around the regulation's table of contents.

B

A first classification

What you have running, sorted provisionally into what the Act cares about and what it does not. Enough to know whether anything urgent is sitting there.

C

A one page position note

Written to be circulated. What applies, what does not, what is unresolved, and what the next decision is.

D

Article 4 credit

The obligation to ensure a sufficient level of AI literacy has applied since February 2025. This session counts toward it rather than sitting outside it.

How it runs

Half a day, remote, with a short exchange before and the note after.

01

Before

A short list of the AI you know about, and who in the business owns each of those systems. Half an hour of your time.

02

The session

What the Act asks of a deployer rather than a developer, what already applies, and your systems against it, live.

03

The note

One page, written afterwards, in language a board reads rather than language a regulator writes.

04

What follows

Often nothing for a while, which is a legitimate outcome. Where the session surfaces something urgent, the position and roadmap is the next step.

What sits behind it

No AI Act engagement is published here yet. The regulated delivery behind it is.

What it costs

EUR 2,000

Fixed fee, half a day, remote

Fixed, and small on purpose.

This is the cheapest way to find out whether any of the rest applies to you, and it is a real piece of work rather than a sales call with a deck. Plenty of these end with me saying the urgent thing you feared is not urgent.

If it leads to the position and roadmap, it leads there because the session found something, not because the session was designed to sell it.

Fit

For a leadership team, not for a project manager.

It works when the people in the room can change something. A briefing delivered to someone who then has to persuade the actual decision makers loses most of its value on the way.

If you already know the Act applies and you need a defensible classified inventory rather than an orientation, start at the position and roadmap instead.

Common questions

Is this legal advice?
No. I advise on implementation, documentation and literacy, and I am not a substitute for legal counsel on interpretation. Where a question is genuinely a legal one, I will say so rather than guess.
How many people should attend?
Usually four to eight. Enough that the decisions can be made in the room, few enough that it stays a working session.
We do not build AI, we just use it. Does the Act apply?
Often yes. Most of the obligations that bite first apply to deployers rather than developers, which is exactly the misreading this session exists to correct.
Can it be in Dutch?
Yes. The session, the note, and any follow-up, in Dutch or English.

The session is worth booking when your honest answer to what the Act asks of you is a shrug.

Start a conversation