AI decisions for leaders
What deserves attention now, what can wait, and which questions should be answered before budget or reputation is committed.
Trainings and workshops
A useful AI training should change a conversation, a decision, or a piece of work. I start with your situation, not a catalogue of tools.
People enjoy the demos, save the prompts, and return to the same process on Monday. That usually means the session never reached ownership, incentives, risk, or the work itself.
Who does what today? Where does the work wait? Which exceptions require experience?
Risk, operations, and leadership often see the same use case differently. The workshop should surface that.
Sometimes that is a pilot. Sometimes it is better data, a named owner, or a decision to stop.
A board may need to challenge an investment assumption. An operations team may need to redraw a handover. A public organisation may need to decide what accountability means in practice. Those are different sessions.
Duration follows the question. A briefing creates direction. A workshop works on the problem. A longer track makes room to test what the team decided.
2 to 3 hours
A focused session for boards and leadership teams: what AI means strategically, where it creates value, what to decide next.
Half or full day
A team brings one process or business question into the room. We examine where AI helps, where judgment stays human, and what is worth testing.
Several weeks
For organisations that need time between sessions to test assumptions, involve owners, and learn from real use rather than workshop energy.
These are conversations I often enter. Your situation may combine two of them or require a different question.
What deserves attention now, what can wait, and which questions should be answered before budget or reputation is committed.
Bring one process. We trace the handovers, exceptions, data, and judgment before deciding where AI belongs.
A practical look at what an agent may do, what it should never decide alone, and how people can challenge its output.
Policies become useful only when a person knows what to do with a doubtful answer, an exception, or a failure.
Tell me where the discussion is stuck, who will be in the room, and what has already been tried. That is more useful than selecting a course title.
A shared language for discussing AI without pretending every person needs the same depth.
One process, decision, or use case examined closely enough to expose weak assumptions.
A next step the team can explain in its own words.
Otman ran an international technology company for over two decades, founded AI ventures, and teaches as a university professor. He is not explaining AI from a distance.
That matters in a room. When someone asks a hard question about governance, or why a pilot failed, or what their team actually needs to change, the answer comes from practice, not a framework slide.

Something not covered here? Just ask and I will get back to you.
It can be delivered at different levels. Executive and business sessions are non-technical and focus on understanding, use cases, and decision-making. Bootcamps and implementation programs go deeper into workflows, agents, data, and architecture.
No. A tool may be part of the session, but it is never the whole session. We connect AI to the work, the people using it, the decisions around it, and the risks that appear in practice.
Yes. The audience, sector, current maturity, and one real organisational question shape the session. Existing material is adapted only when it serves that context.
Yes. If the room finds a use case worth pursuing, a longer track can help clarify ownership, test assumptions, design the pilot, and learn from actual use.
The session can move between technology, business, behaviour, and governance without treating them as separate problems. The discussion stays close to real work and real decisions.
Sessions run in English, Dutch, French, or Arabic, online or in person, across Europe and the MENA region.