Use cases

The situation

Sarah Collins is responsible for workforce capability in a government agency. She sits in the People and Capability group, accountable to senior executives for agency-wide learning priorities such as digital capability, leadership development, and now AI literacy.

On Wednesday afternoon, she's pulled into a short meeting with her Deputy Secretary. GovAI is rolling out, and the question she's asked sounds simple: "Can we confidently say our people know how to use AI safely and professionally in their day-to-day work?"

What she sees

Sarah pauses, not because nothing is happening, but because too much is happening unevenly.

From the data she can see, AI use is already emerging across the agency. LMS reports show patchy completion of AI-related learning. Some policy and program branches are using AI in approved environments to draft briefs, summarise consultation feedback, and generate options papers. Corporate and communications teams appear to be early experimenters.

At the same time, other teams — particularly those dealing with sensitive policy, regulatory work, or contentious issues — are deliberately holding back. The risk of "getting it wrong" feels greater than the benefit of experimenting.

Then there's the middle. A large group of staff starting to try AI where access allows, but without confidence. They're unsure what information is appropriate to use at OFFICIAL level, how much they should trust AI-generated summaries, or how APS privacy, ethics, and governance expectations apply in everyday work.

The real problem

AI tools became available faster than shared understanding, role-relevant guidance, and scalable learning. Whole-of-government policies and the APS AI Plan set the right principles, but they don't give Sarah a maintained, practical way to build judgement across all roles.

By the end of the week, Sarah has three familiar emails: one branch asking for bespoke AI training "for our context", another asking whether they should pause AI use altogether, and a third asking for clearer, more practical guidance on what's allowed. Responding with a series of one-off solutions will only increase duplication, inconsistency, and long-term maintenance.

How AI Literacy for Everyone helps

What Sarah needs is a credible, agency-wide baseline she can deploy through the LMS. Something that builds shared understanding of how AI works, how to question and evaluate outputs, and how responsibility remains with the human decision-maker.

AI Literacy for Everyone provides that foundation. It complements GovAI and central policy by helping staff build the critical thinking and judgement needed to assess AI outputs, recognise limits and risks, and decide when AI should and should not be used in everyday work. It reduces reliance on repeated one-off advice from central experts.