AI Growth Initiative
8 min readFor five minutes, the whole of Sweden stood still.
At 4:50 on the morning of Sunday, 3 September 1967, every car in the country had to stop. Drivers crossed slowly to the other side of the road and waited. At 5:00 the radio gave the signal. A country that had always driven on the left pulled away on the right.
The photographs from that morning are famous. They show gridlocked Stockholm and people standing on car roofs, and the whole scene looks like the end of the world in 4:3. It's the most repeated part of the story, even though it matters least.
What the photos don't show
Twelve years earlier, Swedes had voted on it in a referendum. Eighty-three percent voted to stay on the left. They didn't want the change.
The Riksdag decided to do it anyway on 10 May 1963 and gave itself four years to prepare. That much time went into a change that would itself take five minutes.
Those four years ran on two tracks at once.
The first track was concrete and sheet metal. Around 350,000 road signs had to be removed or replaced, some 20,000 of them in Stockholm alone. Junctions were rebuilt where a left turn suddenly became a right turn. Buses with doors on the wrong side went to be rebuilt or replaced, and traffic lights and bus stops changed along with them.
The second track was human habit. An information campaign ran everywhere, from television and radio to a song contest about the switch, and its logo even ended up on milk cartons and underwear. Something more serious than a civil servant's sense of humour was behind it: the reflex to turn left sits deeper in a driver than any regulation, and you don't change a reflex with a memo.
Neither track would have been enough on its own. Perfect signage won't help drivers who still run on last week's reflexes. Perfectly briefed drivers won't cope either at junctions built the old way.
What happened next
Now we get to the part hardly anyone quotes.
In the first weeks after the switch there were fewer accidents than before it. On the first Monday after the changeover, 125 collisions were reported, while previous Mondays had seen between 130 and 198. Motor insurance claims fell by forty percent.
The reason is mundane, which is exactly what makes it interesting: everyone was paying attention. People drove more slowly and looked twice, because they didn't trust their own reflexes.
And then the attention ran out. Claims were back to normal within six weeks. By 1969 the accident figures were back where they had been before the change.
The new infrastructure stayed for good, while the drivers' alertness faded. Nobody can live in a state of constant alertness, because alertness is a response to an event, and events end by definition.
This is about you
Your company is changing which side of the road it drives on.
Companies call it an AI rollout, or simply “we have to do something about this”. The mechanism stays the same: a lot of people have to start doing something every day differently from what their reflexes tell them. They have to do it in an environment that isn't set up for it yet.
The sentences I hear on first calls are almost identical from company to company:
„We bought licences for everyone. Fifteen people log in.”
HR Director, manufacturing
„The board is asking about ROI on AI. I don't know where to start counting.”
CFO, logistics
„The March training went great. It's September and nobody has been back to it.”
L&D Manager, FMCG
„IT says it's a compliance risk. The business says competitors already have it.”
COO, retail
„Three teams use three different tools. Nobody agreed on any of it.”
IT Manager
„People are afraid to admit they use AI, because they don't know if they're allowed.”
HR Business Partner
Notice that each of these problems is organizational, even though it's dressed up as a technology problem. That's why buying licences doesn't solve any of them.
What happens after the training
A training day does exactly what that September morning did.
It focuses the attention of an entire organization on a single point. People leave the room full of energy, and for two weeks they show each other what they managed to do with AI. More than 1,200 people have been through the trainings I've run over the past three years. I still consider a training day the best opening move a company can make, and most of my clients start exactly there.
The catch is that a morning like that happens once.
Swedish drivers stayed alert for six weeks, and that was a change that could put you in a head-on collision. A team after one AI training day stays alert for two or three weeks, because the stakes are lower and the quarter comes back faster.
The arithmetic of attention explains that, whatever the quality of the day. A single event cannot hold a new reflex in an organization of hundreds, just as a single morning did not hold the caution of Swedish drivers.
What holds the reflex is everything that happens around the event. Sweden had four years and two tracks for it. A company needs twelve months and the same two tracks, with a training session every month at the centre.
A level up
That's where AI Growth Initiative comes from.
It's a twelve-month programme I run inside your organization on two parallel tracks: the concrete one and the habit one. In a company, that means IT and business.
A training day answers the question “how do we use this”, and the programme answers “how should this work here twelve months from now, and who runs it after that”. The second question usually comes once the first one has an answer, which is why the programme normally starts after a training.
Companies choose it when they treat AI as an area of continuous improvement. AI tools change every quarter and teams look different every year, so only continuous work keeps up with that pace.
Two different people decide about AI in your company, and they rarely sit in the same meeting. One wants to know whether everything complies with GDPR and the AI Act, and the other asks whether AI will shorten the quoting process. Both are right, and both need an answer. Without one, the project stalls and nobody can say why.
Two tracks
The shorter route
No deck is needed. You tell me what isn't working at your company, and I tell you whether this programme makes sense there at all.
+48 606 146 588The monthly rhythm
At the start of the month I ask what's going on at your company, for example which processes hurt or what people tried without success. The answers become the topic of the next session.
I run an online training that anyone interested can join, with no seat limit and no split into better and worse groups. For 70% of the time, participants work on their own tasks.
In a separate session we set strategy and priorities for the next quarter and make decisions about processes and tools. This is where the plan that guides the company through the following months takes shape.
Between sessions I send a newsletter about what actually changed in AI and how to use it at your company. In the closed community you can ask a question on Wednesday at 2 p.m. without waiting for the next session.
After twelve months
Track record
I hold certificates from these universities and companies:
Which level to choose
Scroll sideways to see the full table
| Single trainings | AI Growth Initiative | |
|---|---|---|
| When to pick it | When you want one team up to speed quickly | When you want continuous improvement across the company |
| Cost over a year | 4 trainings × PLN 6,000 = PLN 24,000 | PLN 60,000, or PLN 120,000 with two trainers |
| Time with me | 4 days spread across the year | 96 or 144 hours on a monthly rhythm |
| Continuity | High energy for 2–3 weeks after each day | A fresh foothold every month |
| Compliance and tooling | Covered in the room, decisions stay with you | A dedicated track from month one |
| Access between sessions | 2 weeks of email support after each training | Newsletter and closed community all year |
| Measuring results | Session scores and participant feedback | Metrics agreed up front, reported quarterly |
| What's left after a year | The skills of everyone in the room, plus handouts | AI policy, a chosen stack and an internal lead |
One question
Write to me directly, without filling in a form. I reply within 24 hours.
przemek@pbx.agencyPricing
PLN 5,000 net / month
I run the programme myself and switch between the IT track and the business track. This version suits organizations where both sides already talk to each other and need a shared rhythm.
PLN 10,000 net / month
Each track gets its own trainer: one works with IT and the other with the business, and they stay in constant contact. This version is for organizations where the two sides are a quarter out of sync, which makes decisions stall.
I bill both versions month to month, with no minimum term and no cancellation fee. All prices are net.
Before you ask
For a single training it would be, but for that price you get eight hours of work with your organization every month plus everything that happens between sessions. I match topics to your processes, help with tooling and compliance decisions, write the newsletter and answer questions in the community. A year of the programme costs PLN 60,000 net, while four ad hoc trainings cost PLN 24,000 and give you four strong days. If that's what you need, choose the trainings, because they're cheaper, and I'm telling you that honestly. The programme makes sense when you care about continuity and want the capability to stay in the company without me.
It changes the number of trainers, and both tracks genuinely run in parallel. In the base version I run the programme alone and switch between IT and business. The PLN 10,000 net option brings in two trainers: one handles IT (compliance, GDPR and the AI Act, tool selection, data security) and the other handles the business (processes, adoption, use cases, working with resistance). Together that's 12 hours a month instead of eight, and once a month both trainers hold a joint review and come to you with a single shared recommendation. It's the version for organizations where IT and business are a quarter out of sync and every week of delay costs money.
It won't, because it starts somewhere else. In the first session we establish what your people already know and actually use, and we go on from there. Companies that have had a training are the best fit for this programme, because they already know where AI helped them and can see what was missing. Usually it's rules and someone to own the topic day to day, and the programme adds both, along with a rhythm in which the capability keeps growing.
Buying licences rarely leads to adoption on its own. Most often I see a company paying for several hundred seats while a dozen or so people log in, and procurement asks why it should renew. The tool is usually the smallest problem. What's missing are rules about what may go into a model and someone to ask on a Wednesday afternoon. If you already have the licences, so much the better, because all the work goes into the tools you're already paying for.
You need three people and less time than you'd expect. Someone from HR or L&D hosts the programme and keeps track of needs and dates. One person from IT is enough for the compliance and tooling conversations, and a board sponsor makes decisions once a quarter. Outside the sessions themselves, it will take you two to three hours a month.
Then I bring the topic. Before each month I ask what's going on at your company, and that becomes the session. If genuinely nothing is in the air, I have modules that work in any organization: working with documents, no-code automation, AI in meetings and reporting, and data hygiene and security. There hasn't been a month without a topic yet.
The training part usually can, but a monthly subscription can be awkward on paper, and I don't promise things I don't control. Applications aren't something I file myself, because that's a separate specialism. I refer you to a partner who has handled BUR, KFS and EU funds for years, and on the first call we check what can be covered by a subsidy and what is simpler to invoice normally.
Then we stop. The agreement runs month to month, with no minimum term and no cancellation fee. I know how that sounds for something I sell as a twelve-month programme, but if I had to hold you with a clause, it would mean the programme isn't working. I'd rather you had a reason to stay every month.
The third of September
Sweden spent the four years before 3 September 1967 changing which side of the road it drove on.
It did so sign by sign and bus by bus. On the third of September drivers merely crossed over, and that was the last and shortest part of the whole job.
Many companies start on the third of September and finish there too. They buy licences and run a training day, and a month later they're surprised that everyone is driving the old way. Each of those moves makes sense, but the thing that was meant to connect them is missing.
I suggest starting with the four years, compressed into twelve months.
Tell me where your company stands. I'll reply within 24 hours and say plainly whether I see a fit, including when I don't.