AI-assisted content production — copy, blog, product sheets, translations, social — while keeping brand voice and editorial rigour. The difference between ‘mediocre AI content’ and ‘valuable content’ lies in the judgement of whoever directs it.
Hundreds or thousands of SKUs with product sheets the team can't write by hand. Well-directed AI covers that while keeping quality — and leaves the team for strategy.
Corporate blog, weekly newsletter, daily social. AI accelerates the first draft and frees the team to enrich, not to produce from zero.
You operate in 3-8 markets with localised content. AI translates and adapts with speed and consistency, keeping brand voice per market.
Social posts, campaign descriptions, alt-text on images, landing copy. Small tasks that add up to hours. AI frees 50-70% of that time.
I analyse your current output: content types, voice, registers, recurring mistakes, lead times. I identify where AI adds value and where it would be counterproductive.
Development of voice guides, glossaries, master prompts and templates for each content type. Without this, AI produces generic — with this, it produces coherent.
Integration with your tools (CMS, social, e-commerce). Workflows where AI produces the first draft and the team edits. Tracking of quality and consistency.
Usage protocols (what's allowed, what isn't), ethical criteria, transparency towards the customer, continuous prompt improvement. Editorial AI without governance degrades over time.
Well implemented, generative AI multiplies productivity without sacrificing quality. Concretely:
First draft generated by AI + human review. For tasks like product sheets or translations, productivity multiplies by 3 to 4 times.
Voice guides applied systematically via prompts guarantee the brand sounds the same in blog, social, sheets and customer service. Coherence the human team alone never reaches.
Real-time translation and localisation at quality far above the automated translation of 5 years ago. New markets viable on a modest budget.
Repetitive and mechanical tasks (descriptions, alt-text, first drafts) come off the team's list. The creative and strategic remains.
For campaigns, generating 10 copy variants or 8 subject-line versions is no longer a constraint. Broad tests become viable — and conversion improves.
Not to replace the team — to avoid having to double it when the business scales. The difference between growing efficiently or with proportional costs.
Winery with 35 references and monthly newsletter. System with voice guides + prompts for sheets, descriptions and newsletter. 4× production with the same team.
El marketing del cerebro es más predictible que el marketing de la opinión. — Ángel Ortega Castro
Online store with huge catalogue and poor sheets. AI implementation for sheets with editorial judgement. 8,000 sheets updated in 6 weeks — months of human work.
B2B company with Spanish-language blog translated to 5 languages. AI + local review system. Production 5× without headcount increase.
CRM, events, content, campaign history.
Trained or generative algorithm guided by rules.
Lead prioritised, content published, decision taken.
Generative AI delivers value when there is volume, defined voice and willingness to govern it. These are the four scenarios where it pays back most:
If your editorial team produces dozens of pieces weekly (blog, social, sheets, newsletter), AI frees significant hours. The return is immediate.
Traditional localisation is costly and slow. AI with editorial judgement reduces cost and time significantly while keeping quality close to human.
E-commerce or B2B catalogue with hundreds or thousands of references. Sheets need SEO quality + brand voice — AI covers that at a scale that's humanly unviable.
If marketing spends 70% of time producing operational content, it has no capacity for strategy. AI frees that time for higher-value work.
Google penalises content without value — not content produced with AI. If AI produces useful, original, well-structured pieces, there is no penalty. The key lies in final quality, not the production method. With human review, well-directed AI passes any quality filter.
If you use AI without voice guides, yes — you all sound ‘like ChatGPT’. If you work with voice guides, glossaries and master prompts, AI reinforces your editorial identity instead of diluting it. Judgement is decisive.
ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini for assisted production. Jasper or Copy.ai for specific integrated workflows. Custom GPT or proprietary assistants when the client wants control. The tool is chosen by use case and governance intent.
It's a critical point. I work with configurations that don't share data for training, enterprise plans with protection clauses, and internal policies on what information can be passed to the AI and what cannot. Without this, saving becomes risk.
No. It frees them from mechanical tasks and lets them focus on the creative and strategic. AI produces the first draft; the human reviews, enriches, brings judgement, brings what AI cannot. Teams that use AI well rise in quality — they don't fall.
First 45-minute session, free of charge and no commitment. If we fit, I send you a detailed proposal within 5 days. If we don't, you take away a useful initial diagnosis.