Hey everyone, I just found this community, and honestly, thank God. I’m a mortgage broker, and my goal is to automate as much of my computer/admin work as possible so I can spend more of my time on the phone selling and writing loans. I went through the Foundations courses, VIP content, and Drawing Room content, but I’m still a little stuck on where to actually start. There’s a lot of information, and I want to set this up the right way from the beginning instead of creating a messy system I have to redo later. I’m semi tech-savvy. I’ve integrated some of my tools through Make.com, and for more complex API work I usually hire a dev on Upwork. I’ve also been using Codex a bit already. I have it connected to my CRM, dialer, and an AI tool that transcribes my calls and creates notes for me. Where I’m confused is how to structure everything for my actual mortgage business. Right now, I have VS Code downloaded, I pay for Codex, and I created a folder called “Mortgage Business” with an agent.md, context.md, and references.md file. My initial thought was to create folders for each part of the business, like: Sales Marketing Ops Finance Then inside each folder, create subfolders for the different roles or workflows within that part of the business. But I’m not sure if that’s the right approach, or if there’s a better way to structure this so Codex/Claude can actually use it effectively. I’d really appreciate any guidance, examples, or recommended starting points from anyone who has already set this up for their business. Also, I’d prefer to continue using Codex since I already have it connected to some of my tools, but I’m open to hearing how others are structuring things with Claude as well.

Looking for people's opinions on something - please speak up. I am blessed to have a handful of high-end professionals that I can discuss AI with. I suppose I use them to help me sharpen my growing spiel for AI, and they likely trust that they are learning something along the way. There is a part where I want to guide them into a place where it is obvious to them that sometimes an LLM alone cannot provide a full level of expertise, and people will have to augment the LLM. Here is the example I use. I say, quite honestly, that I would 100% trust an AI to give me a few home exercises for my two 10lb weights, as an ankle sprain is keeping me from running. I trust any LLM to summarize that for me from the LLM's transformer training. Then I say that I think it is obvious that a third year NBA player would be crazy to ask an LLM, 'I am a third year NBA player going into the final year of my rookie contract. Please give me a summer workout plan before training camp starts in the fall.' - well, maybe not crazy to ask, but crazy to follow that advice without any other input from trainers, his NBA team, etc. It is supposed to be a fun example that guides the conversation into what do you or your company do that is unique and to begin the discussion about methods to add their expertise into their operations. And it worked a few times, until tonight. A high end real estate executive asked me, 'don't you trust an AI to summarize a workout plan for an NBA player?' I thought the answer was an obvious no... but perhaps, live and learn?? I guess I am asking for advice on two things. (1) Do people trust an AI to give an NBA player a workout plan. And (2) How do I fix my example/spiel. I don't want to talk about NBA athletes. My desire is to get people to talk about what they do that is unique and how AI (okay, ICM) can help them. I don't mind a bit of failure, but failing twice in one sentence has lead me here to ask for advice.