Infinite personalization without the AI slop

One of the use cases we talk about a lot is using AI to personalize content infinitely. A good example is a lead magnet: a quiz on a website where someone fills in where they are in their journey of integrating AI into their product, anywhere from greenfield to very advanced, and then receives a report by email with insights and next steps that are personalized for them.
What AI changes about lead magnets
You probably know lead magnets from before LLMs. You filled in a form, and you got back something that was an aesthetically compiled email, assembled from whatever options you chose. It was static. Everyone who picked the same boxes got the same thing.
AI gives you the possibility to generate content that is infinitely personalized. Instead of a static, generic report, the output can be tailored to the team, their needs, and their current state, so the person actually finds themselves in it and it feels personal rather than assembled.
You might also like

AI always returns something, and that is the problem
AI never fails completely — it just returns plausible answers, sometimes wrong. Why ship-and-hope traps teams, and what real iteration on a prompt actually looks like.

Why AI features fail: the silent failure problem
Only 7.8% of teams say their shipped AI features delivered measurable impact. Why AI features fail silently, why teams don't notice, and how to catch it before users leave.

Should you still write PRDs when building AI features?
The programming language is plain English. The prompt IS the spec, so why is the PM three handoffs away? Why "evals are the new PRDs" makes things worse, and what PM-owned AI development actually looks like.