
Prompt Engineering, RAG or Fine-Tuning?
Decision Playbook
Published 8/2026 | Created by Dr. Amar Massoud | HOME PAGE
MP4 | Video: h264, 1920x1080 | Audio: AAC, 44.1 KHz, 2 Ch | | Size: 1.3 GB
Level: Intermediate | Genre: eLearning | Language: English + subtitle | Duration: 56 Lectures ( 4h 55m )
Decide between prompting, retrieval, and fine-tuning
then evaluate cost, quality, security, and readiness.
What you'll learn
- Classify any LLM use case as knowledge-bound, behaviour-bound, or both, using a documented seven-question decision tree
- Decide when prompt engineering alone is genuinely sufficient, and when it is a false economy
- Specify a production RAG pipeline: chunking, embeddings, hybrid retrieval, reranking, grounding, and citation policy
- Assess a dataset and state whether supervised fine-tuning is viable, premature, or simply the wrong tool
- Select and defend a reference architecture that combines techniques, including routing, fallback, and escalation
- Build a cost-per-1,000-requests model and a latency budget for competing designs, and find the crossover point
- Produce a threat model and a production-readiness sign-off pack for an LLM application
- Write an Architecture Decision Record that survives review by an architect, a CISO, and a CFO
Requirements
- Working familiarity with what an LLM is and how an API call works
- Comfort reading an architecture diagram
- No machine learning, maths, or fine-tuning experience required
- Optional, for the Colab lab only: basic Python literacy, as the notebook runs end to end without editing
Description
- This course contains the use of artificial intelligence.
- Most enterprise LLM projects stall on the same question:do we prompt, retrieve, or fine-tune? Pick wrong and you spend six months and a large budget solving a problem the cheapest lever would have solved in three weeks.
- This is not a twenty-hour AI-engineering bootcamp. It is a decision playbook. The deliverable is judgment — the ability to look at a use case and defend a customization decision in front of an architecture review board, a CISO, and a CFO.
What makes this course different
- Decision-first, not tool-first — every section ends by routing a real use case, not by finishing a tutorial
- Enterprise constraints are first-class — cost, latency, privacy, data residency, model risk, and monitoring get real coverage, not an afterthought
- One model company runs the whole course — you follow a single specialty insurer through three real use cases and watch one architecture evolve, rather than nine disconnected demos
- Every section ships a reusable artefact — a decision matrix, an ADR template, a dataset-readiness checklist, a RAG evaluation workbook, a cost calculator, a threat-model template, and a production-readiness checklist
What you will actually do
- Route use cases through a documented seven-question decision tree
- Write and version a structured prompt with a frozen evaluation set
- Specify a production retrieval pipeline and measure its retrieval half separately from its generation half
- Run a lightweight LoRA fine-tune in Colab and audit a dataset for readiness
- Model cost per thousand requests and find the volume where the ordering flips
- Threat-model an LLM feature and complete a production-readiness review
- Write an Architecture Decision Record recommending one approach, with rejected alternatives and their rationale
- You need to know what an LLM is and how an API call works. You do not need a maths background, an ML background, or any fine-tuning experience.
Who this course is for
- AI solution architects designing LLM systems for enterprise use
- Technical product managers scoping LLM features and defending the budget
- Enterprise developers evaluating prompting, retrieval, and fine-tuning options
- Consultants advising clients on practical AI adoption
- IT and security leaders governing LLM deployments
- Teams that have to decide how to customize an LLM and justify the choice
