Skavio Meeting: turn a recording into an unapproved action-item draft
Skavio Meeting turns a recorded discussion into a speaker-aware transcript and a report containing decisions, action items and open questions. That gives reviewers a structured starting point, not an approved record of commitments. The practical task is to check what was actually agreed, leave missing details visible and keep approval and distribution under human control.
1. Confirm upload permission, then generate the report
Before uploading, confirm that your organisation authorises the recording’s use with the service and that applicable recording and upload requirements have been addressed. Having access to a recording does not, by itself, settle whether it should be submitted to an external processor. On the Skavio Meeting web page, sign in, select the recording and use “Process meeting”. The documented workflow combines AssemblyAI transcription and speaker diarization with OpenAI meeting analysis. Outputs include a speaker transcript, summary, key points, decisions, action items, open questions and a follow-up draft. Treat those report sections as generated interpretations to review—not evidence that participants approved their contents.
2. Check who spoke before assigning responsibility
Start with the speaker transcript rather than the action-item list alone. Locate passages where someone appears to accept work, name an owner or set a deadline, then compare them with the recording. Speaker separation is not the same as verified identity. AssemblyAI’s documentation distinguishes generic speaker labels from speaker identification and identifies overlapping speech, background noise and similar-sounding voices as challenges. Do not turn a label such as “Speaker A” into a colleague’s name without checking. Pay particular attention to negations and conditions. “I can do that if legal approves” does not establish an unconditional assignment. If the audio does not resolve the speaker or wording, record “needs confirmation” rather than making a confident attribution.
3. Separate suggestions from accepted work
A useful draft preserves the difference between an idea, a decision and a commitment. NIST’s Generative Artificial Intelligence Profile identifies confidently presented false or erroneous generated content as a risk. Polished wording is therefore not a substitute for checking the source. Consider this fictional example: “We could ask procurement for another quote” is a suggestion unless the surrounding discussion establishes an assignment. “I will request another quote” supports a proposed action attributed to the verified speaker, but supplies no deadline. Check later exchanges too: someone may withdraw an offer, change the scope or make the work conditional. In your review notes, keep unresolved proposals under open questions rather than presenting them as agreed tasks.
4. Build a review record without filling the gaps
In a separate document or spreadsheet, create a manual review record for each proposed action. This is a suggested working structure, not a native Skavio export schema. Preserve the wording and uncertainty that matter; do not invent an owner or deadline to make the list look complete.
- Proposed action: a concrete description supported by the discussion.
- Owner as stated: a name checked against the recording; use “not stated” if absent or “needs confirmation” if uncertain.
- Deadline as stated: the stated date or wording, or “not stated”; confirm the intended date with participants if relative wording is ambiguous.
- Source reference: a recording location you have checked or a short transcript excerpt verified against the recording.
- Unresolved condition: any dependency, approval requirement or qualification.
- Review status: for example, “not reviewed”, “needs confirmation” or “confirmed by participants”; use the last status only after recording that confirmation.
5. Export the draft and keep approval manual
Skavio Meeting supports TXT, DOCX and PDF exports. Keep the speaker transcript alongside the action-item draft so reviewers can inspect the underlying discussion. For a review copy, export DOCX and add “DRAFT — NOT APPROVED” in your document editor before circulating it to the designated reviewers. The label and review process are manual practices, not a Skavio watermark or built-in approval workflow. Ask the responsible participants to confirm ownership, scope, deadlines and unresolved conditions. Record corrections and document approval in your organisation’s chosen document or workflow. A follow-up draft needs the same checks before anyone sends it. Treat export as a document handoff—not as approval of commitments, task assignment or permission to distribute the report. Keep the original generated output distinguishable from the reviewed version, and share each only with its intended audience.