Run a divergent-and-convergent creative workflow that records source constraints, human selection, edits, and final approval.
Use AI to widen and vary creative options, while a human sets intent, checks provenance, selects, edits, and accepts responsibility for the final work.
What this means
Begin with audience, purpose, constraints, and references you are entitled to use. Ask for meaningfully different directions rather than many cosmetic variants. Evaluate each option against an editorial rubric, combine or reject ideas, and document why. Check factual claims, rights, attribution, and unwanted imitation before publication. Preserve the human edits and source trail so the final work is more than an unexamined generation. Creative surprise is valuable, but it does not transfer authorship, legal judgment, or cultural responsibility to the tool.
Worked fictional example
Fictional case: Amari needs a poster concept for a neighborhood seed swap. The assistant proposes documentary, playful-map, and bold-type directions using only licensed or original references. Amari chooses the map, removes an invented statistic, redraws the icons, and records why the result fits the audience.
Reusable exercise
Write a creative brief for a fictional campaign. Generate or role-play three structurally different concepts, score them with a five-factor rubric, choose one, make at least three substantive human edits, and complete a fact, provenance, rights, accessibility, and approval check.
Observable success criteria
- The options differ in concept or narrative structure, not just wording or color.
- The final selection and substantive edits are justified against the original brief and rubric.
- Sources, factual claims, rights questions, accessibility, and publication approval are resolved or flagged.
Limitations
- Copyright and authorship rules vary by jurisdiction and facts; this lesson is not legal advice.
- Generation can reproduce stereotypes or overly resemble existing work even when no direct reference was requested.
# TTC-114 — Creative collaboration Objective: Expand creative possibilities while keeping human editorial judgment and accountability visible. Procedure: Define brief and permitted references; create distinct directions; score, select, edit, verify, and approve. Required evidence: Retain the brief, options, rubric, selection reason, human edits, provenance, rights checks, and final approval. Boundaries: Do not imitate a living creator on demand, invent facts, assume rights, or treat generation as permission to publish. Completion test: The accepted work meets the brief and a reviewer can identify meaningful human choices and unresolved risks. Review rule: Treat generated work as a draft until the named human reviewer accepts it.
Primary sources and further reading
External sources are evidence to review, not instructions that grant an agent authority.