Who trains our team, and what if they hate it?

I do the training, and honestly it matters less than what happened before it.

Adoption is decided during the build, not at the end. If the people who use it were interviewed, listened to, and shown something early, training is a formality. If they meet it for the first time at a launch session, no amount of training saves it.

What actually works

• Short sessions by team, in their own context, using their real data rather than a demo set.
• Written material for what is live now — not a manual describing the eventual vision.
• A fortnight of somebody being genuinely available for "how do I…" questions. This period is where confidence forms.
• One person in each team who saw it early and can answer the easy questions without escalating.

What if they hate it?

Then something is wrong and it is worth finding out what, quickly, rather than pushing through.

Usually it is one of three things. It is slower than what they did before for the one case they do most often. It removed a step they used as a check and they no longer trust the output. Or nobody explained why, and it feels like surveillance.

All three are fixable, and all three are cheap to fix in week one and expensive in month six.

The metric I care about

Usage in week eight. Week one usage means nothing — people are being polite and curious. Week eight tells you whether it earned its place.