Counterfactual prompting asks AI "what if things had been different?"—like "if this employee had met all stated expectations, would the outcome have changed?" This technique helps you evaluate whether decisions were truly justified or whether the real driver was something unstated, which is especially useful when you suspect a decision was pretextual.
Counterfactual prompting is a technique where you instruct an AI model to reason about what would have happened under different conditions, essentially asking it to stress-test a situation by changing one variable at a time. In workplace contexts, this means prompting an AI to analyze whether a disciplinary action, project reassignment, or performance review outcome would have occurred if your protected characteristics, seniority, or advocacy history were different.
Identifying potential discrimination or unfair treatment is difficult when you are inside the situation. Counterfactual prompting gives you a structured analytical framework to surface inconsistencies in how decisions were applied to you versus colleagues, producing insights that support clearer, more objective conversations with HR or legal counsel.
Peri can explain this concept, give practical examples, help you decide whether it applies to your situation, or recommend a journey if appropriate.
Explore related journeys or tell Peri what you're working through.