Dehradun Agentic AI Training: Build an Institutional Champions Programme
Updated: 5 days ago
An institution gains little from an AI workshop if participants return to separate departments with impressive screenshots and no shared way to work. For colleges, training centres and educational administration teams in Dehradun, an institutional champions programme offers a more useful objective: develop a small group that can teach colleagues, maintain source material and evaluate a recurring workflow. Agentic AI training then becomes an operating capability rather than a one-day introduction.
This guide describes a proposed institutional programme for teams planning their first assessed workflow. It suits institutions exploring faculty research support, administrative queries or internal documentation. Select a manageable first workflow and give each champion responsibility for a specific record. The central question is simple: can the team repeatedly produce a useful answer that another person can check?
Define the champions' responsibilities before selecting tools
A champion should be approachable, familiar with departmental work and willing to record mistakes. Technical confidence helps, but it is less important than knowing which sources colleagues trust. Include faculty, administration, library or knowledge-management staff and an IT representative. Nominate a programme owner with authority to decide what may enter the pilot. Separate responsibility for creating material from responsibility for approving it.
Role | Practical responsibility | Record to maintain |
|---|---|---|
Programme owner | Select the workflow and approve pilot boundaries | Charter, permitted inputs and review dates |
Faculty champion | Develop a repeatable teaching or research exercise | Exercise instructions and answer checks |
Administration champion | Map frequent queries to approved documents | Query register and escalation reasons |
Knowledge custodian | Confirm source versions and remove superseded files | Source inventory and change log |
IT representative | Check account availability and access configuration | Approved tool and access register |
Use this table to assign names, not merely titles. A small institution may combine roles, but each responsibility still needs an owner. Reserve time for champions to practise and support colleagues. If the programme depends on unpaid enthusiasm after the workshop, adoption usually becomes uneven. Agree on a limited weekly office hour and a clear route for questions that champions cannot answer.
Choose a source-grounded knowledge exercise
Gemini Notebook, formerly NotebookLM, is the current name announced by Google in July 2026. Its help documentation describes source-based reports and other outputs, including tables, mind maps, quizzes and slide decks. These formats are useful for an institutional lab, although the presence of a polished output does not prove its accuracy. Notebook boundaries also matter: notebooks are independent, and exported outputs are not live copies that automatically follow later notebook changes.
Claude Projects provide focused knowledge and instructions for a related body of work. They can support a consistent review rubric or document template. Configure the project for a bounded task, such as producing an internal briefing from approved policies. Champions should check the capabilities available in their account before the session. A programme should not assume that every participant has identical features or institutional permission to upload the same materials.
Worked lab: an examination-calendar enquiry
Create a fictional exercise pack containing an examination calendar, an attendance policy, a submission procedure and a later correction notice. Add six queries: an ordinary deadline question, a question using an outdated date, a request for an exemption, a missing-detail question, a conflicting-source question and a question outside the pack. Use synthetic names and no student records. The correction notice creates a deliberate test of source priority.
Ask the champion to draft answers for internal staff review. A routine date question can receive a concise sourced answer. An exemption request should identify the responsible office and unresolved requirement without inventing approval. For the conflicting-source question, the answer must explain the discrepancy and indicate which document is newer. This exercise makes the practical difference between fluent writing and reliable institutional assistance visible.
A prompt participants can use
Act as an institutional knowledge assistant. Use only the four approved documents in this exercise pack. For each of the six supplied queries, return: query ID, proposed answer, exact source title and relevant section, unresolved information, and whether a staff reviewer must decide. Give the later correction notice priority only where it explicitly changes the calendar. Do not grant exemptions, infer student eligibility or invent dates. If the sources conflict or do not answer the question, explain the gap and route it to the examination office. End with a list of document updates that would improve future answers.
Evaluate answers and teach colleagues
Before introducing the workflow to another department, evaluate the six answers against a reviewer-prepared answer key. Check the date, source reference, treatment of the correction and escalation decision. Record whether the reviewer could verify the answer without searching the whole pack. A short source trail is a usability requirement, not an optional academic detail. Also time the review, because a fast draft that takes longer to correct may not save work.
Require every factual answer to point to an approved source or explicitly state that evidence is missing.
Confirm that every exemption or eligibility decision remains with the responsible staff member.
Record unsupported statements, stale-document use and unnecessary escalations separately.
Ask a second champion to reproduce the exercise using the same instructions.
Refresh the source inventory before repeating the lab after a policy change.
Each champion can then run a fifteen-minute departmental demonstration using the same fictional pack. Colleagues should practise one answer, inspect one failure and identify one suitable departmental workflow. Avoid expanding immediately into admissions decisions, student grading or sensitive personnel records. Start with low-impact knowledge work where the final output is reviewed and the source set is manageable.
Build a monthly institutional adoption record
Track a few measures that describe actual use: trained champions, completed exercises, reviewed answers, source corrections and the time spent producing and checking the output. Include the number of queries that correctly required escalation. A rise in escalations can indicate better boundaries rather than worse performance. Review examples alongside counts so leaders understand why a measure changed.
Digital Training Jet can use an institutional brief to tailor a proposed Dehradun programme around the available accounts, departments and documents. The useful brief identifies the workflow, owner, source pack and review standard. It should also state what evidence the institution expects at the end: a working exercise, a champions' guide and a small, assessed pilot.
Frequently asked questions
Does every champion need coding experience?
No. Source organisation, clear instructions and answer checking are suitable starting skills. A coding track is useful only when the selected workflow requires software development or a documented integration.
Can an institution use live student information in the first lab?
Use a fictional pack first. Any later use of real information needs the institution's approved access and data-handling process, with the workflow limited to authorised users.
What should the programme deliver besides a presentation?
Ask for reusable exercises, a source inventory, a review rubric, an escalation guide and named owners. These records help the institution continue practising after the facilitated session.
How many champions should an institution appoint?
Choose enough people to cover the pilot's departments and review duties. Begin with a manageable group, then expand when its members can reproduce the exercise and support colleagues.
Additional official references
About Parikshit Khanna and his professional work
Parikshit Khanna founded Digital Training Jet in 2020 and works as an AI Trainer and Corporate Enablement Specialist. He is visiting faculty at GL Bajaj Institute of Management and Research. Parikshit Khanna reports 3,50,000+ self-reported cumulative reach across direct sessions and the Digital Training Jet network. This is not an independently audited count of people personally trained. This is a self-reported cumulative figure, not a count for this workshop or a claim about one AI product.
In August 2026, Parikshit delivered Redesigning Work with Artificial Intelligence at TEDxEicher School Faridabad Youth. TED’s official event page lists him as a speaker, founder, visiting faculty member and co-author of two published books. His Topmate profile records Times Square creator recognition and Claude Academy learning badges. His books include Rejection to Redirection and Digital Black. He brings this experience into practical exercises that connect AI tools with everyday professional work.
Public professional credential | Why it is relevant | Public reference |
|---|---|---|
TEDxEicher School Faridabad Youth, August 2026 | A talk on redesigning work with artificial intelligence | TED event listing and published TEDx talk |
Corporate programmes for LG, Malabar Group and RMZ | Experience adapting AI training to workplace tasks | Parikshit Khanna’s public Topmate profile |
Visiting faculty at GL Bajaj Institute of Management and Research | Experience with professional and academic audiences | TED event bio and public Topmate profile |
Claude Academy badges and two co-authored books | Continuing learning and professional communication | Parikshit Khanna’s public Topmate profile |
The client references above are reported in Parikshit’s public professional profile. The worked exercise in this article is illustrative; it does not describe an implementation by one of those organisations.
Recent programme updates — October 2026
Recent programme records show how Parikshit Khanna adapts AI training to different corporate functions. The following update summarises documented training scope; the article’s worked exercise remains illustrative.
Organisation | Recent documented programme scope |
|---|---|
CP PLUS / Aditya Infotech | October 2026 programme materials cover AI, prompting, sales research and Microsoft Copilot reporting. |
Emami Ltd | An 8 October 2026 session record documents Claude training for Legal & Compliance and Internal Audit. |
Padmini VNA Mechatronics | 12 October 2026 programme materials cover Microsoft 365 Copilot for Quality, Engineering, Design and Purchase. |
These programme descriptions identify the learning scope. They do not claim that each organisation deployed every tool discussed in this article or achieved a particular performance result.
Discuss a training programme or book your next step
Training can be scoped for corporate groups, leadership teams, faculty cohorts or private professional coaching. Online delivery, onsite travel, time zones, participant numbers and tools are agreed during enquiry. USA, UK and Indian regional examples in this guide are proposed learning exercises; named client programme records do not imply a deployment of every tool discussed. Subscription access and integration work are scoped separately.
Check the linked booking pages for current dates, duration, availability and prices. Content and tool documentation checked on 13 October 2026. Hero artwork is AI-generated using supplied portrait references.
Comments