There's a version of "AI for instructional designers and technologists" that gets bought off a shelf and quietly stops getting used inside a month. Then there's the version wired into the real workflow, owned by a person on the team, still in use a year later. We only build the second one.
AI by role · New Zealand & Australia
What AI actually changes for instructional designers and technologists week to week.
By the numbers
1.07% of all Claude.ai conversations map to this kind of work (Anthropic Economic Index, March 2026). For context, Australia's overall AI usage sits at 4.11× its expected level and Canada at 4.37× (with Singapore leading at 5.53×) — adoption is already well ahead of the curve, so the edge goes to whoever turns it into a concrete workflow first.
Instructional Designers and Technologists sits within Education & Training, one of the sectors we build production AI for.
Without Kiwi Dynamics
With Kiwi Dynamics
Where AI helps
What changes for instructional designers and technologists week to week.
- Build lesson plans and resources.
- Give students instant, cited help.
- Mark and give feedback faster.
- Turn one resource into many formats.
How we build AI for instructional designers and technologists.
We scope narrow, ship a working pilot, then harden it into production. The first slice is the highest-leverage workflow for your team, so value lands before the build is finished. The durable wins augment a person rather than replace them — a human approves anything that matters.
Talk to usThe outcome for Instructional Designers and Technologists
We'd call the engagement a success when Instructional Designers and Technologists are using the system without thinking about us. 1.07% of all Claude.ai conversations map to this kind of work (Anthropic Economic Index, March 2026)
Not your typical AI agency.
Honest about what AI can and cannot do
Ships the one workflow that pays for itself
Hours given back, never the size of the invoice
*Every engagement is scoped and quoted up front. Results vary by workflow and business.
Questions
FAQ
How quickly can we see something running?
Week three for a clickable internal demo against real data. Week six for a slice your team can actually use. We hold ourselves to those numbers because they're what stops a project drifting into "endless discovery".
What's the smallest engagement you'd take on?
A two-week paid discovery for Instructional Designers and Technologists that aren't sure whether the build is worth doing at all. You get a one-page write-up of what we'd build, what we'd skip, and what it would cost. About 30% of those discoveries end with us recommending you don't proceed.
Has this actually shipped for a real instructional designers and technologists team?
Yes. 1.07% of all Claude.ai conversations map to this kind of work (Anthropic Economic Index, March 2026) We'll share comparable engagements on the call.
What tools do you build AI on?
For AI we usually reach for Build lesson plans and resources, Give students instant, cited help, Mark and give feedback faster, Turn one resource into many formats. We're tool-agnostic at heart – we pick what your instructional designers and technologists team team can actually run after we hand the build over, not what looks good on a vendor sticker.
Twenty minutes, your call.
You describe what's broken. We'll tell you what we'd actually do about it.
Get in touch
Talk to us about this
Tell us what you're trying to do and we'll reply with how we'd build it — no obligation.