How to Choose Your First AI Workflow in Marketing and Communications
Five checks to help your team choose a useful starting point, manage risk, and test whether AI improves the work.
Choose a recurring task with reliable inputs, manageable risk, an output someone can check, and a result you can measure. For a marketing or communications team, a strong first AI workflow might be preparing a weekly media briefing or adapting approved content for another channel. Keep the scope small enough that a named person can review every output before it reaches an audience.
The first choice matters because your team will use it to judge whether this is worth doing again. Pick something the people doing the work actually want help with. A modest process that improves their week earns more trust than an ambitious demonstration that creates another job.
What counts as an AI workflow?
An AI workflow is a repeatable process in which AI performs defined steps within a larger piece of work. It has a starting point, specified inputs, an expected output, an owner, and a review step.
For example, a communications coordinator gathers the week's approved media clips, AI prepares a structured draft briefing, and the communications lead checks it against the original coverage. The approved briefing then goes to its usual recipients. Everyone knows where their responsibility begins and ends.
How do you choose the right task?
Bring a short list of candidates to the people who do the work. Austley's Choose Your First AI Workflow workbook includes a scorecard for comparing them. For an initial conversation, work through these five checks.
Does it repeat often enough to learn from?
Look at work that happens at least weekly. Frequent tasks give you more opportunities to observe what goes wrong and improve the process. An annual campaign-planning exercise may be important, but you will wait a long time for a second attempt. Ask which recurring task people keep putting off and why.
Are the inputs ready?
Identify exactly what the task needs: a published article, a standard analytics export, approved messaging, or a set of media clips. Can someone find the current version without chasing three colleagues? If the team cannot agree which source is authoritative, settle that before adding AI.
Can you contain the risk and use the data?
Start with material your organization permits in the chosen tool. Confirm permissions for third-party content, too. Keep customer records, employee information, and confidential plans out of an initial pilot unless the relevant owners have explicitly approved that use. A review step cannot undo an unauthorized upload.
Also ask what happens if the output is wrong. A draft waiting in a shared document is easier to correct than a message already sent to every employee. Save crisis statements, sensitive personnel communications, and autonomous publishing for a different conversation.
Can a reviewer check the result?
Name the source the reviewer will use and the errors they will look for. A media summary can be checked against the coverage. A product FAQ can be checked against approved product information. An open-ended request to recommend the company's next positioning strategy is much harder to evaluate consistently.
NIST's Generative AI Profile identifies confidently presented false information and human overreliance on AI among its risks. Our practical recommendation is to give the reviewer a specific checking task and enough time to do it.
Will the improvement be worth measuring?
Choose a result that matters to the practitioner: less preparation time, fewer correction rounds, or a shorter wait for an approved deliverable. Record today's performance first. Count input preparation, review, and rework when measuring the AI-assisted version. Faster drafting alone tells you very little about the whole job.
Use these checks to narrow the list. Unresolved data permissions or an output nobody can reliably review should take a candidate out of the first round, regardless of its potential time savings.
What could a first workflow look like?
Consider a hypothetical communications team that prepares a weekly media briefing. The coordinator spends time reading coverage, organizing it by topic, and assembling a first draft. The communications lead adds context and approves it.
For the pilot, the coordinator continues selecting the coverage. AI works only from supplied material the team has permission to process. It drafts a short summary of each item with its source link, publication date, and relevant topic. Missing information must be flagged for review.
The communications lead verifies names, dates, quotes, and the meaning of each summary against the originals. They add the implications for leadership themselves. AI does not decide which issues require escalation or send the briefing.
Track total preparation and review time, plus factual corrections. If this hypothetical 60-minute task takes 40 minutes with AI, the saving is 20 minutes per run. If extra checking pushes it to 65 minutes, the process needs work. Those are illustrative calculations, not promised results.
How should you run the first pilot?
Write the process down before building it. The Workflow Spec provides a template covering the trigger, inputs, AI's responsibilities and limits, reviewer, data rules, and success measure.
Start with a few past examples so the team can compare the draft with an accepted result. Then try current work under review. Include an awkward case, such as incomplete inputs or conflicting source information. Record what the reviewer changes and use that feedback to improve the instructions.
Set a review date about a month out, keeping the existing process available. Decide whether to keep, revise, or stop the pilot based on the work produced and the effort required. Expand only when the team can explain why it is working.
Frequently asked questions
Does an AI workflow need to be automated?
Describe the item or answer the question so that site visitors who are interested get more information. You can emphasize this text with bullets, italics or bold, and add links.No. A person can start each run using a saved set of instructions and a shared review document. Test the process before investing in integrations.
Who should own the workflow?
Choose someone close enough to the work to maintain its inputs, resolve failures, and improve the process. Give them time for that responsibility. Ownership should be explicit, even on a small team.
What if different team members want different pilots?
Keep the other candidates on the list. Select the one with a willing practitioner, ready inputs, and an available reviewer. Agree when you will revisit the remaining ideas.
Choose one workflow to test
Use Austley's Your First AI Workflow workbook collection to choose and document your pilot.
If your team would benefit from working through it together, explore our AI enablement and training.
Recent Posts






