The challenge
Preparing for a meeting can mean reopening the CRM, shared folders, and a colleague's notes. On inherited accounts, an old proposal may conflict with the customer's latest request without anyone noticing.
This scenario suits teams with repeat customer meetings and recurring document searches. Accounts and document versions need to be identifiable before retrieval is useful.
Information to prepare
Define the source owners, document dates, and permitted readers before choosing the retrieval scope.
| Input | What to check |
|---|---|
| Meeting notes | Identify requests, open questions, and the date of each conversation |
| Past proposals | Check scope, assumptions, and document versions |
| CRM records | Check ownership, opportunity status, and previous actions |
| Current product information | Compare prior proposals with what can be offered today |
The workflow
Adapt the following responsibilities to the team's existing workflow.
| Step | AI and system role | Human role |
|---|---|---|
| Choose the account | Retrieve relevant material within the user's access permissions | Specify the customer and meeting objective |
| Organize evidence | List needs, previous proposals, and unresolved points with sources | Check for outdated documents and similarly named accounts |
| Draft the brief | Prepare questions and a proposal outline | Decide pricing, contractual terms, and commitments |
| Prepare for the meeting | Record edits in a reusable brief | Approve the final preparation notes |
An example output
The following example was written around fictional source material. It is not customer data or output from a deployed system.
| Field | Example content | Source or status |
|---|---|---|
| Customer need | Confirm whether several departments can use the service | Meeting note A |
| Previous proposal | Start with a pilot in the sales department | Proposal B |
| Question for the meeting | Clarify departments and access requirements | Suggested question based on the two documents |
| Unresolved point | Confirm current pricing and delivery dates | No confirmed terms in the source material |
Human review and operating conditions
Unknown budgets and decision-makers remain explicitly unconfirmed. Retrieval follows source permissions and shows document dates. Email delivery and final CRM updates require human review in this design.
Evaluate a narrow pilot
A possible evaluation would select around ten active accounts after checking access permissions. Compare conventional preparation with assisted preparation, including time spent reviewing and correcting the brief.
The sample size is a planning example. Agree on acceptance criteria in advance and evaluate time saved alongside review effort. Changes in win rate require separate measurement.
| Measure | What to record |
|---|---|
| Preparation time | Total time spent finding, reading, reviewing, and correcting |
| Accuracy | Unsupported statements, missing information, and outdated sources |
| Usability | Edits requested by sales representatives and managers, with reasons |
Explore the next step with Atlas Support
Describe the document types, current preparation steps, and recurring difficulties. There is no need to send confidential documents with the initial inquiry.
Depending on the agreed scope, we can map the workflow, review data and access, build a prototype, and define evaluation criteria. The evidence then informs the operating scope and remaining issues.
Discuss this workflow
Tell us about one recurring task and the types of documents your team uses. We can help define the scope and the evidence needed for a first evaluation.