How SharePoint environments can be improved for Copilot results

image

The short answer is this:

Copilot results are only as good as the SharePoint environment underneath them. If your SharePoint is messy, overshared, full of duplicate files, stale content, and inconsistent naming, Copilot will surface messy, duplicate, stale content. If SharePoint is well-structured, governed, and maintained, Copilot becomes dramatically more useful.

From everything I’ve seen in SMB environments, improving SharePoint for Copilot usually delivers a bigger productivity gain than buying additional AI licences.

1. Fix permissions and oversharing first

This is the most important step.

Copilot doesn’t magically know what information is important. It relies on Microsoft Graph and existing permissions. If users can access content they shouldn’t, Copilot can discover and surface that content.

Common problems

  • Everyone has access to everything

  • Legacy project sites never cleaned up

  • Anonymous sharing links still active

  • “Everyone except external users” permissions

  • Former employees still own sites

What to do

  • Review site permissions

  • Remove unnecessary access

  • Review sharing links

  • Remove broad access groups

  • Identify inactive sites

  • Implement site lifecycle management

SharePoint Advanced Management and Data Access Governance reports were specifically highlighted as ways to identify oversharing risks before Copilot rollout.


2. Create a proper information architecture

Many organisations have:

Documents
├── New Folder
├── Old Stuff
├── Final
├── Final V2
├── Copy of Final
└── Misc

Copilot struggles because the business itself has no structure.

Instead build:

Finance Hub
├── Budget Planning
├── Forecasting
├── Reporting
└── Policies

Sales Hub
├── Proposals
├── Customers
├── Pricing
└── Marketing

The clearer the structure, the easier it is for:

  • SharePoint Search

  • Microsoft Search

  • Copilot Chat

  • SharePoint Agents

  • Copilot Agents

to locate relevant content.


3. Improve file naming standards

Copilot does read document content, but filenames still matter.

Bad:

Proposal.docx
Proposal New.docx
Proposal Final.docx
Proposal Final Final.docx

Good:

CustomerName-Proposal-2026-07.docx
CustomerName-SOW-v1.docx
CustomerName-SOW-Approved.docx

In one of your SharePoint discussions, naming conventions were specifically called out as something that should be standardised across the site.


4. Use metadata instead of folders where possible

Metadata is one of the biggest Copilot improvements available.

Rather than:

Projects
 ├── Sydney
 ├── Melbourne
 ├── Brisbane

Use columns such as:

Column
Value

Client
ABC

Region
Sydney

Project Type
Migration

Status
Active

This gives Copilot richer context when searching and grounding answers.

Instead of finding a file based only on its location, Copilot can reason over:

  • client

  • project type

  • status

  • department

  • business owner


5. Remove stale content

One major challenge is outdated content appearing in search results.

Microsoft now provides features that recommend:

  • demoting inactive pages

  • identifying content gaps

  • fixing broken links

to improve discoverability and Copilot relevance.

Ask yourself:

  • Is this document still current?

  • Is there a newer version?

  • Does anyone own it?

  • Should it be archived?

A common issue is Copilot finding a policy from 2019 while a better one exists from 2026.


6. Identify authoritative sources

One of the newest improvements is the ability to mark SharePoint sites as authoritative.

Examples:

  • HR

  • Finance

  • Legal

  • Corporate Communications

Content from these sites can be prioritised in Copilot Search and Copilot Chat results.

For example:

Site
Why make it authoritative?

HR
Official policies

Finance
Budgets and governance

Legal
Contracts

Company Communications
Executive announcements

This helps reduce contradictory responses.


7. Apply sensitivity labels

Copilot respects sensitivity labels and information protection controls.

Typical labels:

  • Public

  • Internal

  • Confidential

  • Highly Confidential

Benefits include:

  • Better governance

  • Controlled sharing

  • AI visibility controls

  • Better compliance outcomes


8. Improve search quality

Copilot depends heavily on Microsoft Search.

Poor search equals poor Copilot.

Things that help:

Create quality pages

Instead of storing everything in Word documents:

  • Create SharePoint pages

  • Add summaries

  • Add FAQs

  • Add ownership information
Add page owners

Every key page should have:

  • business owner

  • review date

  • contact person
Use meaningful titles

Bad:

Welcome
General Information
Policies

Good:

Employee Leave Policy
Expense Claim Procedure
Remote Work Guidelines


9. Build hub sites

Hub sites create logical business groupings.

Example:

Corporate Hub
 ├── HR
 ├── Finance
 ├── Operations
 └── IT

Customer Hub
 ├── Sales
 ├── Marketing
 └── Service

Hub sites improve navigation, search context and content relevance for Copilot.


10. Create SharePoint agents for specialised knowledge

Where a user only needs answers from a particular area, create a SharePoint Agent.

Examples:

  • HR Agent

  • Policy Agent

  • Finance Agent

  • Project Agent

These agents ground themselves on specific SharePoint locations and often produce more accurate answers than tenant-wide searches.


11. Add more organisational context

Copilot works best when content explains:

  • who owns it

  • what it is for

  • where it applies

  • when it was reviewed

Bad document:

Procedure.docx

Good document:

Financial Approval Process
Owner: Finance
Review Date: July 2026
Applies To: Australia Operations

The extra context significantly improves grounding quality.


12. Measure and improve continuously

The best Copilot environments are not set-and-forget.

Establish a quarterly process:

Review
  • Oversharing

  • Inactive sites

  • Broken links

  • Orphaned content
Clean up
  • Duplicate files

  • Old projects

  • Stale policies
Improve
  • Metadata

  • Authority sites

  • Labels

  • Search experience

Data Access Governance reports and Content Management assessments are specifically designed for this ongoing process.

My practical SMB recommendation

If I were preparing a tenant for Copilot today, I’d prioritise:

  1. Permission cleanup

  2. Oversharing remediation

  3. Sensitivity labels

  4. Review inactive sites

  5. Standard naming conventions

  6. Create hub sites

  7. Add metadata

  8. Designate authoritative sites

  9. Build targeted SharePoint agents

  10. Quarterly governance review

In most SMB tenants, doing just those ten things improves Copilot results more than any prompt engineering or user training because you’re improving the quality of the information Copilot can see and trust.

The Clock and the Compass

image

I watched two people come undone this year, in completely opposite ways.

One never stops moving. Every day is a sprint — inbox at zero by eight, three deadlines cleared by lunch, a task list that breeds faster than he can knock it down. He hits his targets and feels nothing, because there’s already another target waiting. He’s busy in a way that looks impressive and feels hollow. Ask him where all this running is heading and he goes quiet.

The other has the opposite problem. She knows exactly where she’s going. She’ll talk for an hour about the business she’s building five years out, the kind of work that genuinely matters to her. But the payoff sits so far away that nothing she does today feels like a win. Months drift past. The vision is lovely, and the week is empty of anything that actually moved her closer to it.

I’ve been both of these people. Most of us only ever pick one.

There’s a clock in all of us, and there’s a compass. The clock is urgency — it’s what gets you out of the chair. The compass is direction — it tells you whether all that motion is worth anything. On their own, each one quietly fails you. All clock, and you run hard in circles. All compass, and you stand in the driveway, certain of the destination, never turning the key.

Pick a direction you’d never want to finish

The first move is choosing something big enough that you can’t tick it off. Not a goal with a finish line, but a pursuit — getting sharper at your craft, serving a particular kind of client properly, building something that outlasts you. That’s the compass. It doesn’t expire the moment you hit a number.

This is where I lean on Copilot more than people expect. When the long game feels fuzzy, I open a blank Word document, bring up Copilot, and just talk to it — what am I actually trying to build, what does good look like in three years, what would I regret not starting. It drafts, I push back, it sharpens. Twenty minutes later I’ve got a direction I can re-read on a Monday morning when everything else is shouting for attention.

Then build short games you can actually win

A compass won’t get you moving on a Tuesday. You need something to chase this week. So I carve the long thing into small games with a real scoreboard — wrote this, rang that client, shipped one improvement. Proper finish lines, close enough to feel.

I keep mine in Planner, with Copilot doing the slicing. I’ll describe the quarter out loud and ask it to break the work into weekly chunks I can tick off. Then every Friday I get Copilot to pull together what genuinely got done across my Teams chats, my sent items and my tasks — not what I planned, what moved. That summary is my clock. It’s the small hit of winning that the compass can never give me, and it stops a good direction from slowly going nowhere.

The trick was never choosing between the two. It’s wiring them together — a direction you’d hate to ever finish, fed by a steady drip of small wins you can finish by Friday.

The people running on empty are short a compass. The people standing still are short a clock. Look honestly at your own week. Whichever one you’re missing — that’s the one to fix.

When the Business Can See Itself

image

I’ve been thinking about what management does in a business that no longer works in one building, on one floor, during one neat block of time.

For a long time, the manager was the routing table. They knew who was doing what, which customer was unhappy, which project was drifting, which person was overloaded, and which promise had been made in some meeting three weeks ago. Not perfectly, but well enough to keep the place moving.

That made sense when work was hard to see unless someone told you about it. In a distributed business, that assumption breaks.

The work is already leaving tracks

Most modern work now happens inside systems. A decision is made in Teams. A client concern turns up in Outlook. A draft sits in Word. A spreadsheet in Excel tells part of the story. A task appears in Planner. A policy is updated in SharePoint. None of those items explains the business by itself. Together, they show a pattern.

The mistake I see is treating those signals as separate piles of information. Email over here. Meetings over there. Documents somewhere else. Then we ask managers to join the dots manually and call that leadership.

That is becoming a poor use of judgement.

With Microsoft 365 Copilot, the interesting shift is not simply that someone can summarise a meeting or draft a reply faster. The bigger change is that the organisation starts to build a current picture of itself from the work already happening. Not a quarterly report. Not a dashboard that goes stale after publication. A live operating view drawn from the flow of the business.

Management changes when context is shared

I am not suggesting managers disappear. That is too simplistic. What changes is the kind of work they should be doing.

If Copilot can help surface the commitments from recent Teams meetings, unresolved customer emails in Outlook, and documents sitting untouched in SharePoint, then the manager’s job is less about chasing status and more about asking better questions.

Why is this decision waiting? Why are three people circling the same problem? Why is the client hearing one thing in email and another thing in the project plan? Why is the hard work always landing on the same person?

That is where human judgement matters. Not in carrying every detail in your head, but in interpreting what the picture means and deciding what to do next.

This matters for remote and hybrid teams. In an office, people used proximity as a crude form of awareness. You overheard something. You noticed who kept getting interrupted. You saw who was staying late. It was imperfect and often unfair, but it gave managers signals.

Digital work produces different signals. They are quieter and scattered. But they can also be more consistent if you have the discipline to organise them properly.

The hierarchy stops being the memory

The old model depended on layers of people carrying context upwards and downwards. That creates delay. It also creates distortion. By the time a problem reaches the right person, it has usually been softened, simplified, or stripped of the uncomfortable details.

AI changes that. Used carefully, Copilot can help leaders inspect the work itself. Not to micromanage people. Not to spy. To understand the shape of the business before the monthly meeting turns into archaeology.

That will make some organisations uncomfortable, because it exposes a simple truth: many businesses do not have a management problem as much as they have a visibility problem.

The organisations that benefit most from AI will not be the ones that generate the most content. They will be the ones that use it to see clearly, decide earlier, and stop pretending that hierarchy is the only way context moves.

That is the real shift I am watching.

One Edit Away From Digital Oblivion

image

There is a special kind of fear that only appears after you press save on a Markdown file and the entire publishing pipeline falls over.

Not a dramatic fear. Not screaming in the street. More the quiet, professional terror of staring at a screen thinking, “I only changed one line.”

That is the funny thing about modern work. We talk about transformation, automation and AI as if the future is floating gracefully above us. Then a missing bracket, a badly indented bullet, or one heroic colon in the wrong place reminds everyone that civilisation is still held together by plain text and hope.

The smallest change can have the loudest voice

I like Markdown. It is simple. It is readable. It keeps content close to the person writing it rather than burying it under layers of formatting gymnastics. A good Markdown file feels honest. What you see is almost what you get.

Almost.

Because one tiny edit can turn a neat document into a crime scene. A table stops rendering. A link eats the next paragraph. A heading becomes normal text. Suddenly the document that looked perfectly sensible in your editor appears in SharePoint like it has had a hard weekend.

This is where a lot of organisations get caught. They assume simple files mean simple risk. They do not. A Markdown file can be part of a blog, a knowledge base, a GitHub repository, an internal procedure, a training handout, or a client-facing instruction set. If that file drives a process, then the little typo is no longer little. It has been promoted.

Copilot is useful, but it is not a seatbelt for carelessness

This is also where Copilot changes the conversation in a useful way. I can paste a Markdown section into Copilot in Word or ask Copilot in Teams to review a draft before I send it around. I can ask it to spot broken structure, unclear steps, inconsistent headings, or a table that looks ready to start a small fire.

That does not remove responsibility. It just gives me another set of eyes before I publish something that makes future me question past me’s life choices.

The real benefit is not that Copilot makes the edit for me. The benefit is that it slows the moment down just enough for me to think. Is this still clear? Did I break the flow? Does the document still say what I intended? Have I just created a support ticket disguised as punctuation?

That last one matters.

Version history is cheaper than regret

The sensible answer is boring, which is usually how you know it works. Keep important files in SharePoint or OneDrive so version history is available. Use Teams to discuss changes where the people affected can see the conversation. If the document matters, do not treat it like a disposable note on the side of your monitor.

For MSPs and small businesses, this is not academic. Your documentation is part of your service delivery. A password reset process, onboarding checklist, security exception register, or client build guide can all live as ordinary files. If someone “just fixes a sentence” and breaks the meaning, the cost may not appear until someone follows the bad instruction perfectly.

That is how documentation gets dangerous. It does not need to be malicious. It just needs to be confidently wrong.

So yes, we may all be one edit away from Markdown oblivion. But we are also one review, one version history check, one Copilot pass, or one quick peer glance away from avoiding it.

The lesson is simple. Respect the little files. They know where the bodies are buried.

The Bystander Effect Is Quietly Killing Your Marketing

image

There’s a famous bit of psychology that explains why a person can collapse on a busy footpath and twenty people walk past. It’s called the bystander effect. When responsibility is spread across a crowd, everyone assumes someone else will step in — so nobody does. The more people present, the less likely any single one of them acts.

I’ve come to believe the same thing happens in marketing, and most of us never notice it. We think the problem is that people are rejecting us. Usually they’re not. They’re just standing in the crowd, assuming the message was meant for the person next to them.

“Everyone” Is Nobody

When you write an email, a newsletter, or a webinar invitation addressed to everyone, you’ve accidentally recreated that footpath. The reader scans it, decides — without much thought — that it’s aimed at some other, more relevant person, and moves on. They don’t unsubscribe. They don’t send an angry reply. They simply file you under “not for me” and get back to their day.

That quiet non-decision is far more dangerous than a flat “no”. A rejection at least tells you the message landed. The bystander never even picks up the phone. You walk away thinking the offer was weak, when really the offer was fine — it just never felt personal enough for anyone to claim it.

I see this constantly with MSPs marketing to small business. We send a generic “we can help with your IT” message to a list of three hundred contacts and wonder why two people reply. The content isn’t the issue. The aim is. Three hundred people each assumed we were really talking to one of the other 299.

First Aid Trainers Got There First

Anyone who’s done a first aid course has been taught the fix already. When you’re standing over someone who needs help, you don’t shout “somebody call an ambulance” to the crowd. You point at one specific person — “you, in the blue jacket, call triple zero now.” The instant that individual realises they’ve been singled out, they move.

That’s the whole game. The moment a person understands you are talking to them, the bystander effect collapses and action becomes possible. Marketing is no different. The job isn’t to reach more people — it’s to make each person feel seen.

Naming the Person, Not the Crowd

So how do you point at the blue jacket without writing three hundred individual emails? This is where I think the tools we already pay for earn their keep.

Most MSPs sit on a goldmine of context they never use. You know which clients are still on ageing hardware, which ones asked about security last quarter, which ones have a renewal coming. That detail is scattered across Outlook threads, meeting notes, and a CRM nobody opens. The work of pulling it together used to be the reason we defaulted to “Dear valued customer”. It isn’t anymore.

I’ll draft a campaign in Word and ask Copilot to rewrite the same core message for three distinct groups — manufacturers worried about downtime, professional services worried about compliance, retailers worried about card data. Three versions in the time it used to take to write one bland one. Each reader recognises their own world in the words, and the bystander reflex never gets a chance to kick in.

Copilot in Outlook does the same thing one conversation at a time. Before I reply to a prospect, I can have it summarise everything we’ve ever discussed and surface the one concern they keep raising. The reply then opens with their problem, in their language — not my service menu. That’s the digital version of pointing across the room and saying the person’s name.

Even your segmentation gets easier. I’ll drop a client export into Excel and let Copilot group accounts by industry, size, or last contact, so the list I’m writing to is genuinely a room of similar people rather than a faceless mob. The narrower the room, the easier it is to talk to everyone in it as if they were one person.

One “Yes, You” Away

The shift here is small but it changes everything. Stop trying to be relevant to a crowd. Be unmistakably relevant to one type of person, and let them know you mean them.

Your next client is probably already on your list. They’re not ignoring you out of disinterest — they’re waiting in the crowd, quietly assuming the invitation belongs to someone else. The work isn’t louder marketing or a bigger list. It’s removing the doubt about who you’re speaking to.

Point at the blue jacket. Use the context you already have, the tools you already pay for, and address the person directly. You might be one moment of genuine recognition away from the conversation you’ve been chasing all quarter.

When the Fix Stops Being a Fix: Troubleshooting in the Age of Probabilistic IT

image

For most of my working life, troubleshooting an SMB environment was a hunt for a single, knowable cause. Something was broken, and somewhere there was a reason. A permission was wrong. A DNS record pointed at the wrong place. A service had stopped. You worked the chain backwards, found the link that had failed, fixed it, and the problem went away. The same input produced the same output, every time. That was the quiet contract underneath everything we did. IT was deterministic, and our whole troubleshooting craft was built on that assumption.

That contract is now breaking, and AI is the reason. The more our clients lean on tools like Microsoft 365 Copilot, the more we find ourselves chasing problems that don’t have a single cause and don’t behave the same way twice. We’ve spent decades learning to solve deterministic problems. We’re now being asked to solve probabilistic ones, and most MSPs haven’t noticed the ground shift under their feet.

“It Worked Yesterday” Now Means Something Different

Here’s the scenario I keep running into. A client calls because Copilot gave them a wrong answer. It summarised a meeting and missed the one decision that mattered. Or it drafted a reply in Outlook that referenced a document the user swears they never mentioned. Yesterday it was brilliant. Today it’s confidently wrong. Nothing changed on your side. No update shipped. No setting moved.

Under the old model, “it worked yesterday and not today” was a clue. It told you something had changed, and you went looking for the change. With AI in the mix, that same sentence tells you almost nothing. Large language models are probabilistic by design. The same prompt can produce a different response on Tuesday than it did on Monday, and that’s not a bug you can ticket your way out of. It’s how the technology actually works.

So when a client reports that “Copilot is broken,” your first instinct — find what changed — quietly fails you. There may be nothing to find. The behaviour you’re chasing isn’t a fault in the wiring. It’s variance in the output. And variance doesn’t sit still long enough to be caught with the tools we’ve always used.

The Cause Isn’t Always in the System

The harder adjustment is accepting that the problem often isn’t technical at all. When Copilot returns a poor result, the cause is frequently the question, not the code. A vague prompt, missing context, the wrong document open in the background, permissions that quietly scope what Copilot can and can’t see — these shape the answer far more than any registry key ever did.

I had a client convinced Copilot in Teams couldn’t read their project files. The real issue was that the files lived in a SharePoint site the user didn’t have access to, so Copilot, correctly, never touched them. The system was working exactly as designed. The human’s mental model was the thing that was broken. There was no error in any log, because there was no error. Try writing that up in a standard ticket resolution.

This is the part that unsettles seasoned engineers. We are trained to distrust “user error” as a lazy diagnosis. But with AI, the boundary between the tool and the person using it has genuinely blurred. The quality of what Copilot produces is now a function of context, phrasing, data access, and the user’s own clarity of thought. Half of real-world “AI problems” are actually grounding problems — Copilot simply wasn’t given the right material to work with. You can’t fix that with a script. You fix it by teaching.

From Repair to Probability Management

So what does troubleshooting look like when certainty is gone? It looks less like repair and more like managing probability. Instead of asking “what’s broken,” you start asking “why is this likely happening, and how do we make the good outcome more likely next time.”

That changes the work in practical ways. You start checking what Copilot can actually see — the SharePoint and OneDrive permissions, the Purview sensitivity labels, the data the user assumes is in scope but isn’t. You look at how the question was asked, not just what the system returned. You reproduce the issue several times, because one bad answer is an anecdote, not a pattern. You document tendencies rather than root causes, because a tendency is often the most honest thing you can record.

It also changes what you sell. The deterministic world rewarded MSPs who could find and fix. The probabilistic world rewards MSPs who can guide, set expectations, and shape how AI gets used across a client’s day. The value moves from the repair to the relationship.

Sitting With Uncertainty

None of this means our old skills are worthless. Plenty of SMB problems are still gloriously deterministic — a licence didn’t assign, a mailbox didn’t migrate, a Conditional Access policy locked someone out. Find it, fix it, move on. That work isn’t going anywhere.

But a growing slice of what lands in your queue now has no clean answer, and pretending otherwise only frustrates everyone. The MSPs who’ll do well from here are the ones who can hold two modes at once — the precision of the engineer and the judgement of an advisor who’s comfortable saying “here’s what’s most likely, and here’s how we improve the odds.” Learning to sit with that uncertainty, rather than fight it, might be the most valuable troubleshooting skill of the next decade. I’m still getting used to it myself.

The Robots Didn’t Kill Sales. Relevance Did.

image

Let me be upfront: this isn’t a post about watching other people lose their footing. I’ve seen it happen — quietly, without announcement — but pointing at cautionary tales reads as smugness, and it doesn’t help anyone. What does help is understanding the mechanism. Because the mechanism doesn’t care whose career it applies to, including mine.

The Slow Fade

When AI started making headlines, a certain explanation took hold in IT circles: the robots came and took over. Clients automated their way out of needing you. Algorithms undercut your value. Technology made your expertise redundant overnight.

I’ve sat in rooms where that story got told with great conviction. And I understand the appeal — it’s clean, it’s external, and it lets everyone off the hook.

But I don’t think it’s the real story. At least not for most people.

What I’ve actually watched happen is something quieter, and frankly more avoidable. Skilled people — genuinely skilled, with real depth — stopping. Stopping posting, stopping presenting, stopping sharing what they were learning. Getting busy, or burned out, or simply assuming that reputation would carry. And then discovering, over months rather than days, that the market had quietly moved on.

The market doesn’t issue a formal notice. It just stops calling.

Presence Is a Practice, Not a Trophy

Here’s the thing about credibility in professional services: it behaves more like a subscription than an asset. You don’t acquire it once and keep it indefinitely. You maintain it — week by week, post by post, conversation by conversation — by staying present in the space where your clients and prospects are paying attention.

The people I see holding their ground right now aren’t necessarily the most technically brilliant. What they share is a habit of doing something worth knowing about and then talking about it. They’ve been working through how Copilot in Teams handles a fast-paced client meeting — the kind where the conversation moves faster than anyone can type — and they write up what actually happened. Not a polished case study. A genuine account of what worked, what surprised them, what the documentation didn’t quite prepare them for.

That’s what gets shared. That’s what gets remembered. That’s what gets you back into the conversation when a prospect is deciding who to ring.

The alternative — doing excellent work quietly, trusting that results will speak for themselves — used to be viable. It worked when markets were smaller and word of mouth moved reliably. I’m not sure it works the same way now. Attention spans are shorter, competition is louder, and the gap between the visible and the invisible keeps widening faster than most people expect.

The AI Angle Nobody Wants to Admit

Here’s where I’ll give the “robots did it” crowd a partial concession: the shift toward AI tools has accelerated everything. But not quite in the way most people mean.

What it’s accelerated is the gap between people who are actively inside the change and people who are observing it from a safe distance. Clients are asking questions about Copilot, about automation, about what Microsoft 365 actually means for how their team works day to day. The people who get those calls are the ones who have been publicly working through those questions — who’ve shared what Microsoft 365 Business Premium looks like in practice for a 40-person firm, or explained what Copilot in Outlook actually does to a full inbox on a Monday morning, drawing from real client experience rather than a vendor one-pager.

The others get found too. Just by someone else.

So if you’re waiting until you feel fully prepared to share — waiting for the perfect case study, the right moment, enough certainty — I’d gently push back on that. The market is not waiting with you. It’s watching whoever is showing up.

The Account Runs Down

I think of staying relevant the way I think about any recurring obligation: you can miss a payment here or there without immediate consequence, but the balance erodes. And by the time you notice the problem, you’re already working against a deficit. Rebuilding takes longer than maintaining ever did.

The fix is not complicated, even if it takes discipline. Engage with something genuinely new — a client challenge, a corner of the Microsoft 365 stack you haven’t properly explored, a question your market keeps circling. Arrive at a real view. Then share it, in your own voice, without waiting until it’s polished enough to be mistaken for marketing material.

Work on things that matter. Then put them where the people who should know can find them.

That’s the whole playbook.

The careers that fade aren’t usually the ones that got disrupted by technology. They’re the ones that went quiet. The ones that assumed the work would carry its own story forward.

It doesn’t. You have to carry it.

Don’t go quiet.

When the Product Is the Answer

MAI_d2738865c0ceccd4

A few years ago, I paid real money for an online course about something I could have googled. Not because the information wasn’t out there — it was — but because someone had packaged it up into a tidy sequence, with a PDF checklist at the end. That felt like value. I’d trade some cash for the shortcut.

I’m not sure that trade still makes sense.

There’s a question worth sitting with if you sell courses, run a newsletter, or operate any kind of advice business: what exactly are you selling? If the core of your offer is “I know how to do X, and for a fee, I’ll explain it to you,” then you’re competing — right now, today — with a chat interface that will do the same thing for free, in plain language, at any hour, and answer every follow-up question without sighing.

That’s not pessimism. It’s just arithmetic.

The Commodity Shift

The thing is, knowledge transfer was already becoming cheaper. YouTube, forums, documentation sites — the raw material was free or nearly so long before any of us had heard of a large language model. What the structured course or the curated newsletter offered was organisation and trust. Someone had done the sorting for you.

AI has now taken that arrangement apart. Ask Copilot in Microsoft 365 how to build a pivot table, how to structure a client proposal, how to read a balance sheet, or how to write a meeting agenda — and you’ll get a clear, accurate, step-by-step answer in seconds. It knows context. It remembers what you asked two prompts ago. It adjusts when you say “that’s too complicated, simplify it.” The experience of learning from it is genuinely conversational in a way that a pre-recorded video module is not.

For anyone whose business rests primarily on the instruction layer — here’s how to do the thing — that shift deserves honest attention.

What Doesn’t Commoditise

I don’t think this means the advice economy is finished. But I do think it clarifies what was always the actual product, beneath the packaging.

What an AI won’t give you is accountability. It won’t check whether you actually implemented what it told you, or notice that you’ve been stuck on step three for six weeks because there’s something uncomfortable underneath the technical question. A good advisor, coach, or community does that.

It also won’t give you judgement built from real exposure to your specific industry, your clients, your context. I can ask Copilot about pricing strategy for an MSP, and I’ll get a reasonable answer. But the answer from someone who has personally renegotiated forty MSP contracts and remembers what went wrong — that carries a different weight.

The value proposition that survives isn’t “I’ll explain the concept.” It’s “I’ve seen this pattern before, here’s what it usually means, and here’s what I’d actually do.” That’s the part that takes years to earn and can’t be scraped.

What I’m Watching

My own approach has shifted. The things I now put into writing — whether that’s a post, a session, or anything structured — I try to hold to a higher bar than “here’s how to do X.” Anyone can get that from Copilot. What I’m aiming for is the observation behind the explanation: the why, the tradeoff, the thing that only becomes clear once you’ve been surprised by the edge case.

The knowledge economy isn’t dying. It’s just shedding the parts that were never really the point.