An operations manager at a logistics company finds her team uses the most capable model for everything, including tidying one-line meeting notes and drafting routine shift-swap messages. During busy morning handovers these replies are slow, and the company's AI guidance asks staff to match the model to the task. The team also uses Claude for occasional complex route-planning analysis. What should she change?
- AKeep the most capable model for every task, because better quality outweighs a short wait during handovers
- BMove the whole team to the fastest model for everything, including the complex route-planning analysis
- CSteer routine notes and messages to a faster, lower-cost model and keep the top model for complex planning Correct
- DAsk the team to write longer, more detailed prompts so the most capable model returns its answers faster
Why A is wrong: Defaulting to the top model feels like the safe choice. For one-line tidy-ups it adds delay and cost with no visible quality gain, and it ignores the company's guidance to match the model to the task.
Why B is wrong: This fixes the slow mornings and cuts cost. It over-corrects: the route-planning work genuinely needs deeper reasoning, so pushing it onto the fastest model risks weaker analysis.
Why C is correct: This matches each kind of work to the model it needs: quick, simple items go to a faster, cheaper model, while the occasional complex analysis keeps the most capable one. It follows the company guidance and removes the morning delay.
Why D is wrong: Better prompts often improve results, so this sounds sensible. Longer prompts do not make a model respond faster, and the real issue is using a slow, costly model for trivial work.