Research, Monitoring and Preparing Briefings

Researching a topic, following your sector and preparing a briefing for a meeting eat hours. AI can speed up the framing, the reading and the structuring, but it is also the tool most likely to hand you a confident invention. In this lesson you will learn a cautious research method: frame the question, cross-check sources, build a briefing and cite only what you have verified.

Chapter 2 was about producing and transforming text. In this chapter we move from writing to thinking: analyzing information, organizing work and making decisions. We start with research, where the risk of error is highest.

Camille's competitor question

Camille's director asks: "What are our competitors doing with sustainability claims in their marketing? I need a one-page briefing for Thursday." It is Tuesday afternoon. She could ask an assistant, "What do our competitors say about sustainability?" and paste the answer into a page. That would be a mistake for three reasons: the assistant may not have current information, it may invent examples, and she would have no way to show where any claim comes from.

A better approach treats AI as a research assistant that helps with method, not as the source of facts.

Step 1: frame the question

A vague question gives a vague answer. Before searching, write down:

• The decision or use: what will this research be used for?
• The scope: which competitors, which period, which country or market?
• The sub-questions: what exactly do I need to know?
• The type of evidence: official publications, press, customer reviews, regulations?

An assistant is a good partner for this step, because it can propose angles you had not thought about. Ask it to question you before it answers.

A ready-to-use prompt: frame the research

I need to research the following question for my work as [job title]: [question].
It will be used to [decision or document, e.g. prepare a one-page briefing for a manager].
Help me frame it. First ask me up to 5 clarifying questions (scope, period, market, depth).
Then propose: (1) 4 to 6 sub-questions, (2) the types of sources I should consult for each, (3) keywords to search for, (4) the main risks of bias or error in this research.
Do not answer the research question itself and do not invent facts.

Step 2: search prudently

Depending on your tools, an assistant may be able to browse the web or search documents, or it may rely only on what it learned in training. Know which one you are using, because it changes how much you can trust an answer.

• Without access to current sources: use it for method, vocabulary and structure, not for facts. Anything recent or precise needs an external check.
• With search or document access: it can give a faster overview and point you to sources, but it can also summarize them badly or attach a claim to the wrong source. Open the sources.
• With your own documents: you can ask for answers based only on those, and ask for quotes. This is the safest way, provided the documents are not confidential and the tool is approved.

Treat every source suggested by an AI as a lead, not as proof. Check that it exists, that it says what is claimed, who published it, when, and whether it is independent or has an interest.

Step 3: cross-check

A single source, even a good one, is rarely enough for a claim that matters. Build the habit of triangulating:

• Look for at least two independent sources, ideally including a primary one (the company's own statement, the regulation text, the dataset).
• Distinguish facts, opinions and marketing statements.
• Note the date: information ages quickly.
• Ask the assistant to play devil's advocate: "What would a skeptical reader say about this claim? What evidence would contradict it?"

Step 4: build the briefing

Once you have verified material, the assistant becomes very useful for organizing. A good briefing is short, structured and honest about its limits. A common layout:

1. Question and purpose in two sentences.
2. Key findings, each with its source.
3. What is uncertain or unknown.
4. Implications and options for the reader.
5. Sources list with dates.

A ready-to-use prompt: briefing from verified material

Prepare a one-page briefing for [audience] on [topic], using ONLY the verified material below. Each item has a reference (number or name) and a date.
Structure: purpose in 2 sentences; key findings (each followed by its reference in brackets); what remains uncertain or unknown; implications and 2 or 3 options for the reader; list of references.
If the material does not support a conclusion, say so. Do not add facts, examples or sources that are not in my material. Flag any contradiction between sources.
Material:
[1] [source name, date]: [excerpt or summary written by you]
[2] [source name, date]: [excerpt]
[...]

How to cite and verify

A claim in a briefing should be traceable. For each important claim, you should be able to say: where it comes from, when it was published and who wrote it. Practical rules:

• Cite the original source, not the assistant. "According to the AI" is not a source.
• Quote exactly when you quote; paraphrase when you do not, and make sure the paraphrase keeps the meaning.
• For figures, go to the original table or document, and note the date and the definition used.
• If you cannot find the source of a claim, remove it or label it clearly as unverified.

Also consider the rights attached to what you collect: a source being accessible does not necessarily mean you may reproduce it in full. For a general framework, remember that copyright and data protection rules apply to documents you paste into tools as well as to what you publish.

Bad use versus good use

Bad use	Good use
"Tell me what our competitors claim about sustainability" and paste the answer into the briefing.	Frame the question, collect competitor pages yourself, then ask for a structured comparison based only on them.
Citing "studies show" with no source because the AI said so.	Finding the original study, reading it and citing it precisely, or leaving the claim out.
Relying on a single answer.	Cross-checking with at least two independent sources and asking for counter-arguments.

Your turn: a prudent mini-briefing

Exercise. Choose a question relevant to your work that needs an answer in the next weeks (for example, a regulation that affects you, a tool you are considering, a trend in your sector). (1) Use the framing prompt. (2) Collect three sources yourself and write a two-line summary for each, with its date. (3) Generate a briefing from your verified material with the prompt above. (4) Check that every finding carries a reference and that none appears that was not in your material.

See a solution

Camille's frame: "Purpose: decide whether to keep or adjust our sustainability messages. Scope: three direct competitors, the last twelve months, our home market. Sub-questions: what claims do they make, how are they worded, are they backed by a label or a proof, how do customers react?" She collects the three competitors' product pages, one customer review page and the text of the relevant consumer guidance published by an official body, summarizes each in two lines, and generates the briefing from them.

Her verification found that one finding mentioned "most competitors use recycled-material labels", while her sources showed only two of three did. She corrected it to the exact count and added "unknown: how customers perceive these claims", because her material did not cover it. The briefing was shorter, but every line was defensible.