Which company records should we inventory first?

Start with a coherent business function whose records your company can authorize. Describe systems, history, outcomes and rights gaps before counting files.

Must we assemble a full-company export?

No. Describe what exists first. Agree a buyer task, approved scope and preparation responsibilities before undertaking extraction.

Does having many years of records guarantee a sale?

No. Depth describes an archive; it does not establish rights, quality, demand or a price.

What does Garrow need from us?

A description of the company, systems and broad record categories. Garrow does not receive files, samples or screenshots.

Business Records to License for AI: Owner’s Guide

The best starting point for business records to license for AI is an inventory of company-owned work history you can explain and authorize. Look for meaningful context, reliable relationships and documented outcomes, then identify rights and quality gaps. A buyer evaluates a defined package; the existence of a large archive does not guarantee demand.

Begin with a business function you understand

micro1 publicly lists operational documentation, CRM and project histories. These categories can help frame an inventory, but they are not a request for every file in your company.

Choose a function with a knowledgeable internal owner. Describe what the team does, where it records decisions and how it knows work is finished. A function-level description is more useful than an undifferentiated claim that your business has valuable data.

Our recommendation is to inventory in place. Ask the internal owner to describe the systems and record categories without exporting them. At this stage, the goal is to learn what exists and which questions must be resolved.

Do not use this exercise to introduce new data collection solely because a buyer might be interested. Existing archives, newly annotated records and future participation should remain separate proposals with separate obligations.

Put the records in a practical map

Use the following map as an editorial inventory aid. It describes possible roles for records, not confirmed buyer demand or an automatic eligibility list.

Record category	What to describe internally	Main question to resolve
Email histories	Business functions, thread coverage and related actions	Which correspondence and attachments can be licensed?
Sales history	Opportunities, decisions and documented commercial outcomes	What do stages and outcome labels actually mean?
Support archives	Investigations, escalations and resolution evidence	Is closure evidence of a fix or an administrative action?
Documents	Instructions, versions and approval status	Who authored the material and which version applied?
Call transcripts	Conversation categories, quality and permission evidence	Does the proposed use fit the reviewed permissions?
Workflow records	Actions, exceptions, approvals and resulting states	Can the work be understood without excluded dependencies?
Human AI reviews	Task context, outputs and reasons for judgments	Are inputs, outputs and new review work explicitly accepted?

Read the detailed email checklist, sales-records guide and support-data guide where those categories are relevant. Their purpose is to make your description precise, not to broaden access to systems.

Identify the company's own record

Polyshares distinguishes its target operational records from material held on behalf of clients. Apply that distinction at the record-category level, not just the company level.

Your business may own an internal scheduling procedure while holding customer technical files under a restricted contract. A consultant may have written a report without holding the right to license it. An employee may have access to a supplier manual without your business owning that manual.

Prepare a rights register identifying the source, responsible reviewer, relevant agreements and unresolved questions. Ask counsel to review customer contracts, contractor arrangements, confidentiality terms, prior licenses and acquired archives where applicable.

Identify the person who can authorize the scope

Identify who can authorize each proposed category and who must resolve outstanding questions. Ask the reviewer to check client-held files separately from the company's own operating records. Keep willingness to discuss a license separate from permission to deliver the material.

Describe connected work without inventing completeness

Our recommended unit is a coherent work item with the context needed for the proposed task. It might span a system entry, an approved instruction and a follow-up event. Describe how those pieces connect and which connections your archive preserves.

A completed status may mean different things across systems. Ask the internal owner to define it. If completion means no further action was taken, do not describe that as a verified successful outcome.

Document missing context. A work history may depend on an attachment excluded by contract, a conversation never recorded or a system no longer available. Those gaps affect interpretation and should be disclosed before a buyer assesses the package.

Use the operational workflow article to distinguish recorded activity from planned activity. Avoid filling historical gaps with new stories that sound plausible. Later annotations should be identified as later work.

Explain quality using the records you actually have

Prepare an internal list of duplicates, automated content, incomplete cases, inconsistent labels and obsolete instructions. Record how the company can identify each issue. Where the answer is unknown, label it unknown.

Count units that correspond to your description. Messages, tickets, projects and completed cases are different measures. Do not add them into a single impressive total without explaining the mixed units.

Ask whether the archive has stable identifiers and meaningful version history. An export containing only the latest state may be usable for a particular task, but it should not be marketed as a complete chronological history.

Keep measurements reproducible internally. If the administrator cannot explain how a count was produced, use a qualitative description until it can be checked. Do not publish an estimate as a verified archive fact.

Put privacy and confidentiality into the scope

Have the responsible advisers identify personal information and confidential business material before any sample is shared. Decide whether an approved slice can meet the proposed task with fewer details.

The ICO's pseudonymisation guidance distinguishes risk reduction from a blanket escape from data protection obligations. Removing obvious identifiers should not be presented as universal permission to license the remaining text.

Our recommended review also covers credentials, legal advice, sensitive customer categories and contractual restrictions. Name excluded categories in the proposed package. A general promise that the buyer handles privacy does not explain what leaves the company or who checks it.

Garrow never receives your files or anonymizes them. The company and proposed buyer need a written handling process, appropriate permissions and adviser review. Do not send Garrow sample data to demonstrate that it is safe.

Distinguish potential buyer uses

Ask a buyer to explain whether it wants training material, evaluation cases, retrieval content, new human judgments or another use. Each purpose may require different records and different contractual rights.

A hypothetical evaluation task could test whether an AI assistant follows an approved escalation rule. That might require the rule and an authorized case. It would not automatically require unrestricted access to the entire company archive.

Keep new services separate. If the buyer wants employees to produce labels, review answers or participate in continuing workflows, define that labor explicitly. Our human AI feedback guide explains why an archive license should not silently become a service contract.

Do not promise a performance improvement from your records. The seller's job is to describe evidence and limitations; the buyer must assess whether the package suits its task.

Compare the defined package with the actual proposal

Keep the initial inquiry, proposed terms and signed agreement separate in your internal planning. Ask the buyer to define the package, review process and acceptance conditions before allocating significant preparation work or treating potential payment as committed income.

Prepare a description of the operating history and identify a person authorized to discuss it. Flag professional reports and client-held files for the rights reviewer rather than placing them in the proposed package by default. Record unresolved questions alongside the record categories.

Assess the record description, rights and proposed use together. Avoid treating willingness to discuss a transaction as permission to license the archive. Keep any unresolved category outside the proposed scope until the responsible reviewer has addressed it.

For commercial preparation, read how to assess company data value. The guide separates public evidence, advertised claims and actual proposed terms.

Prepare a description that supports an introduction

Your initial description should name the company type, country, systems, broad record categories and period covered. Identify who can authorize a discussion and what rights questions remain. Keep customer identities, file excerpts and detailed record contents out of it.

Garrow assesses that description for a possible buyer introduction. We tell you the name and reason before you decide. The buyer then evaluates any approved records and makes its own offer; Garrow does not hold the archive. The data card shows an indicative comparison based on your answers.

You pay no fee to Garrow; the buyer pays us. That arrangement does not make us your legal adviser or guarantee a transaction. You can decline an introduction or a proposal.

Use Garrow's intake to describe your company and systems.