AI Sparingpartner

The method involves conducting simulated interactions with AI playing a specific role in order to practise communication, decision-making and responses to realistic professional
situations. It bridges the gap between knowledge and action in an environment that is, by nature, changeable and unpredictable. It also creates a safe space for practice in which students can test different types of responses from the other party.

Interaction with AI is dynamic: each statement triggers a response, requiring attentiveness, precision and conscious management of the conversation. The tool acts as a simulation partner with a specific attitude, needs and reactions. As a result, students develop the ability to understand the other party’s perspective.

A key value of the method is immediate feedback, which helps students identify which elements of communication strengthen the relationship and which lead to tension or escalation.
The process is repeatable, allowing students to test different strategies repeatedly within the same scenario and consciously improve their performance. As a result, learning moves from the declarative level to the performance level, thereby strengthening students’ confidence and readiness to act.

The method can be implemented through situational simulations, in which students conduct a conversation with AI playing a specific role, such as a client, patient or colleague. It can also be used in an analytical variant, in which the completed interaction is followed by a detailed analysis of the conversation and communication decisions, together with suggestions for alternative responses.

Course: Management / HR
Topic: Communication and Managing Resistance
Students take on the role of managers who have to inform a long-serving employee that they are being transferred to another department. AI plays the role of the employee, who feels demotivated and undervalued.

Warm-Up (5–10 min)
A short lecture on assertiveness techniques and dealing with resistance. Students prepare a list of factual and emotional arguments.

Scenario Set-Up (10 min)
Students instruct AI which role it should take on, for example:
Take on the role of a 50-year-old specialist who has worked in the company for 15 years. Jan is loyal, but afraid of change and new technologies. I am your manager and I have to tell you that your current team is being dissolved. React sceptically, defend your current position, but remain realistic and do not become aggressive without reason. Wait for my first message.

Simulation (15–25 min)
Students conduct the dialogue. They must actively listen to the bot’s responses and adapt their communication in order to calm Jan down and persuade him to accept a new development path.

Deconstruction and Analysis (15 min)
After the conversation, students ask AI for feedback:
Assess my approach as a manager. What did I do well, and at what point did you, as Jan, feel the greatest resistance?
Students then discuss the conclusions in groups.

• When the course prepares students for professions requiring frequent interaction with people, such as doctors, teachers or lawyers.
• As a way of overcoming shyness or anxiety about public speaking or oral examinations.

• When dealing with highly sensitive topics where AI hallucinations could be harmful or unethical.
• If students are not yet familiar with the basic theories of communication.

• The bot may give in to the student’s arguments too quickly → add the following to the prompt: Be persistent and require me to provide concrete evidence.
• The exercise may be treated superficially and without engagement → it is worth introducing a time limit or a clearly defined goal for the conversation, to encourage focus and realistic decision-making.

Easier → Provide students with ready-made, tested prompts and clear scenarios. The AI should adopt a cooperative stance, and the aim should simply be to apply the selected technique correctly. Students can work in pairs: one interacts with the AI, while the other acts as an adviser.
More Challenging → Introduce ambiguity into the situation and conflicting signals from the AI, such as statements that do not match its behaviour. Students must interpret the context, adapt their strategy, and respond to the changing dynamics of the conversation.

• Ensure that the role of the AI and the purpose of the conversation are clearly defined, so that students know what they are expected to learn, not just what they are expected to do.
• Encourage short rounds of conversation, with pauses to analyse key moments, rather than one long interaction.
• Include a moment of reflection after each attempt, so that students consciously connect their actions with the outcome of the conversation.

Formative Assessment
Students mark the point in the chat transcript at which the bot’s attitude became positive or negative, and explain which of their own statements caused this shift. The lecturer comments on the accuracy of their diagnosis.

Summative Assessment
Students submit a transcript of the conversation together with an analysis that refers to the relevant literature. Their ability to reflect on their own actions and justify them theoretically is assessed.