Core · One day
Open seminar or standard in-house workshop
Reverse stress testing, leading indicators, thresholds, source quality, baseline comparison and an initial decision workflow.
Designed to remain useful as a standalone day.
Practical training for operational risk and AI
When an AI warning arrives, who checks it — and what happens next?
Practical workshops for teams that work with supply-chain risk and uncertain information. Participants examine how signals are interpreted, when escalation is justified and where responsibility remains human.
Philipp Hackländer
Practitioner and facilitator · Berlin
The situation
Warnings are easy to generate. Decisions are harder.
Operational teams now receive more alerts, forecasts and AI-generated explanations. The difficulty is deciding which signal matters, what evidence is missing and when a person should intervene. These questions usually remain implicit until a supplier fails, a forecast breaks or an apparently convincing recommendation turns out to be wrong.
What happens in the room
A decision workflow, tested in practice
The group starts with an operational outcome that must be avoided and works backwards to dependencies, indicators and thresholds. A simple baseline is compared with an AI-supported approach. The scenario then introduces delayed, contradictory or misleading evidence so that the team has to decide who checks, escalates, overrides and records the decision.
01
Recognise
Define the outcome, relevant dependencies and useful signals.
02
Verify
Check the source, missing evidence and confidence behind the warning.
03
Decide
Clarify escalation, responsibility, documentation and fallback.
Shared development value
More than a seminar
The first delivery is also a practical development step. Participants work on a decision they recognise from day-to-day operations. Their organisation can see which signals, responsibilities and evidence still need work. For an academy or programme partner, the same session provides a grounded test of audience, fit and useful depth before a larger curriculum is built.
One working session around a recognisable decision
Participant
Practice interpreting uncertain evidence and making a defensible decision.
Organisation
Inspect the workflow, unresolved evidence and ownership that the exercise exposed.
Programme partner
Obtain evidence about audience, portfolio fit and the depth a later format may need.
This does not require inventing a gap. Existing courses may already cover most of the subject. In that case, the useful outcome may be a narrower module, an in-house lab — or no additional programme.
Programme and formats
AI-Assisted Supply-Chain Risk & Decision Management
Participants build an early-warning workflow, examine unreliable evidence and clarify how their organisation will act under pressure. The standard entry is a one-day seminar; additional depth is selected according to the audience and the decision that needs to be examined.
Optional second-day decision lab
Adds false alarms, misleading evidence, decision rights, audit trails, override and a timed simulation.
Half-day to two-day company case
Uses one company-specific risk, workflow or decision boundary with agreed confidentiality and evidence limits.
Executive or research entry
A short briefing or portfolio discussion tests relevance before either side commits to a full format.
Request the programme outline
Typical participants work in supply chain, procurement, operations, risk, quality, AI or transformation.
Outcomes and proof
What the exercise leaves behind
Examples tied to the selected format
- Risk and signal map with explicit missing evidence
- Thresholds, decision rights and escalation responsibilities
- Override and fallback checklist
- A small pilot or follow-up question grounded in the exercise
One exercise introduces a convincing warning with weak evidence. The group must trace the source and decide whether escalation is justified.
Operational basis
The programme draws on more than 20 years across consulting, leadership and entrepreneurship, including supply-chain transformation, semiconductor-crisis PMO work and the development of an EDI-supported industrial early-warning approach.
A simple baseline, clearer ownership or better source data may prove more useful than AI. The workshop makes that a legitimate result.
View selected projectsFor programme partners
Start with the portfolio you already have
A compact research step examines whether the missing element is content, application, verification or simply a clearer connection between existing modules. The review can include syllabus adjacency, possible cannibalisation and the audience for a narrow first delivery.
That first delivery then tests the assumption with a real audience before either side commits to a larger programme. Existing competence is the starting point. The result may support a broader curriculum, a smaller bridge module, an in-house lab or a decision not to add another offer.
Share an existing syllabusQuestions and next step
Bring one decision problem — or one existing syllabus.
A short conversation is enough to determine whether the useful next step is an in-house case, an open programme, a portfolio discussion or nothing further.
Is this an AI tools course?
No. AI is one possible part of the decision workflow. The workshop concentrates on evidence, escalation, responsibility and what happens when a system is uncertain or wrong.
Do participants need technical expertise?
No. Technical concepts are translated into operational choices. Data and risk specialists can still work at greater depth on calibration, evidence quality and governance.
Can we use our own company case?
Yes. The in-house format uses one selected risk, workflow or decision boundary as working material, with agreed confidentiality and evidence boundaries.
Is this certification training?
No accredited certification is provided or implied unless an authorised training carrier formally offers and approves it.
Is the programme limited to supply chains?
The flagship uses supply-chain risk because it makes uncertainty, dependencies and decision pressure concrete. The working method can be adapted to adjacent operational and governance cases.
What is the smallest useful entry?
A short executive briefing or portfolio discussion can establish whether a one-day seminar, an in-house case or no additional programme is the sensible next step.