Princeton connects administrative AI trials to explicit access expiry and departmental funding

Ask an administrative sponsor, OIT and the budget holder which backlog warrants a bounded test and who could fund continuation. Position a single-workflow evaluation with a decision at its end. The value hypothesis is clearer evidence for a stop-or-continue choice, including an honest negative result. Discover whether staff have protected testing time and whether the process has a usable baseline. Do not present the university's program as evidence of achieved savings, a guaranteed expansion opportunity or a transferable procurement contract.

Choose one approved tool and a limited data set after mapping the workflow's input, review and output steps. Keep production writes outside the first test. Record the model/configuration version and compare assisted work with the existing process for quality, elapsed time and reviewer effort. Include permission rejection, export and access-expiry tests. Prerequisites are representative tasks, data classification and an accountable reviewer. Cloud, local or hybrid placement should follow institutional requirements; the program page is insufficient to certify any deployment choice.

Appoint the department process owner to run the evaluation with OIT support and finance participation. Document baseline cases, train volunteers, provide accessibility support and hold an interim review for unsafe or unhelpful behavior. Proposed acceptance is a complete decision record covering quality, net work effort, recurring cost and staff feedback, plus demonstrated removal of unextended access. Success can be a justified stop decision. Plan handover and funded support only after approval; avoid leaving an unfunded tool embedded in a critical workflow.