THE ANSWER
Assess a specific tool configuration against a defined workflow. Check information handling, output quality, review controls, integration and total operating effort. Record what you observed separately from what the supplier says, and leave unsupported answers unresolved.
Define what you are actually evaluating
Record the supplier, product, plan, configuration and date. Features, contractual terms and model behaviour can vary between accounts and change over time. This page provides a reusable assessment method; it does not rank suppliers or claim that we tested named products.
Give candidate tools the same permitted input and output brief where their functions allow a fair comparison. If one product transcribes audio and another only summarises written notes, separate transcription errors from summary errors.
Use pass, unresolved and fail decisions
For each requirement, retain the supporting evidence and the person who decides. Do not average an unresolved data-handling issue into a reassuring overall score.
| Requirement | Evidence to seek | Decision record |
|---|---|---|
| Information handling | Relevant terms, retention controls, access and approved processing arrangements | Approved by the responsible person, unresolved, or unsuitable. |
| Output quality | Saved outputs against the same source checks | List error types and corrections, not just a percentage. |
| Human control | Draft status, review step and ability to prevent automatic sending | Demonstrate the control in the intended workflow. |
| Integration | Export, record keeping, source traceability and manual handover | Record any rekeying or lost context. |
| Total effort and cost | Current quote plus measured preparation, correction and review effort | Separate one-off setup from ongoing use. |
| Change and exit | How updates are communicated, data exported and access removed | Record the owner and the next review trigger. |
A deliberately incomplete example decision
Suppose a fictional product produces a useful action list but its retention arrangements have not been reviewed. Record “output example: checked” and “information handling: unresolved”. The conclusion is that it is not yet approved for the proposed client-data pilot. This is an illustration of the decision method, not a supplier finding.
If a pilot proceeds, compare multiple representative tasks and difficult inputs, including missing data and contradictions. Keep failed outputs. A single polished example is too narrow to establish reliability.
Agree the next review trigger
Assign an owner and a review date. A material change in the product, account terms, input type or downstream use should trigger reconsideration. Keep the scope narrow enough to notice when the original approval no longer fits.
APPLY THIS TO YOUR FIRM
Want help turning this into a practical AI workflow?
Work with Steven Calvert on an assessment, a defined pilot or staff training for your IFA business.
Explore AI implementation ↗Prepared with AI assistance. Our examples identify their sources, method and limitations. This article provides business guidance, not personal financial advice, legal advice or a product endorsement. Editorial approach and commercial interests.