Six questions about your team, how AI is already being used, and what data is involved. You get a plain-language verdict — not a score — on whether a fixed-scope package fits, whether something needs settling first, or whether it needs a proper scoping conversation. No email to see it.
There's no defensible weighting model behind a figure like "AI readiness: 74/100", so this doesn't produce one. The result is one of four labelled verdicts, and every reason shown names the specific answer that produced it — you can trace exactly why you got the result you did.
Checked in this order: (1) already using AI informally, no written data rule, and sensitive data at least sometimes in the picture → settle a usage rule first; (2) no named account owner on a team of 16 or more → assign one before the workspace grows; (3) a team of up to 15 with a named owner and a clear use case → the AI Team Setup entry package's scope likely fits; (4) a larger team or an unclear first use case → custom scope. Everything else lands on "reasonably ready, governance step still worth it". The order matters, and it's the order shown — nothing is hidden or weighted behind it.
It doesn't recommend a specific AI platform, because that depends on your existing tools and is confirmed during scoping. It doesn't give any legal or compliance conclusion about your data handling — whether a specific use is permitted is a judgement for your team or counsel, not something a short questionnaire can settle.
Nowhere by default. The result is computed in your browser. Your answers are only sent if you choose to email yourself a copy or open the quote form — and then only the summary shown on screen, never anything you didn't see.
No. The full result appears on screen as soon as you've answered the six questions. Email is only if you want a written copy.
No, and deliberately so. There's no honest weighting model that turns six answers into a meaningful number. You get a labelled verdict and the specific reasons behind it instead.
No. It asks how often sensitive data is realistically involved so it can point toward a written usage rule where one is missing — but whether a specific use of AI is permitted for your business is a legal judgement this tool doesn't make.
That usually means the first use case isn't settled yet — a short scoping conversation about what to build first is a better starting point than fixing a package around an undefined goal.