AI Advantage #3: Conversations
In this episode, we reframe AI as a conversation you practice on purpose.
AI Advantage #3: Conversations
15 Sept
Written By Meg Smith
The quality of AI responses often reflects how willing you are to think deeply about the content you use it to engage with.
In this third episode of the AI Advantage on the Microsoft Innovation Podcast Mark and I discussed the difference it makes to approach interactions with AI as conversations, rather than searches. We also highlighted the need to keep having conversations with family, friends and colleagues as we use AI more since everyone uses it differently.
What you’ll learn:
- How to build prompting skill through small, daily reps.
- How to use conversation structure (goal, audience, examples, iteration) for higher-quality outputs.
- How to set effective Custom Instructions and ask the tool to interview you first.
- How to spot weak guidance in voice mode and push back for evidence.
- How to compare models sensibly and choose depth over distraction.
Ingredients of a great conversation
Every great conversation, whether between you and another person, or you and an AI tool, requires two things: intention and attention.
Intention asks:
Why are you having the conversation? Why are you having the conversation now? Do you have a goal for this conversation?
Attention means:
Do you have time? Do you have headspace? Are you prepared to listen and respond?
Try this prompt
Add this sentence to your prompts to turn them from searches into conversations:
“Before you respond, ask me questions one at a time until you’re 98% sure you have all the context you need to provide the best answer.”
You can listen to or watch the full episode here.
More in Portfolio
AI Advantage #9: Digital Labour
Collaboration and delegation at work will look different in the future where teams are made up of both humans and AI agents.
AI Advantage #8: Personal AI Automation
How can we us AI to save us time in our personal lives?
AI Advantage #7: Creativity
People who say AI is making us dumber lack creativity. I prefer Neil de Grasse Tyson’s take.



