How I Wrote My New Book Using AI (and Why I’m Cancelling Grammarly)

1

I’m about to publish my new book, The Bottleneck Detective. It’s a mix of fiction and non-fiction, written in a thoughtful, detective-noir voice. The book teaches people how to spot bottlenecks in the real world and turn businesses around. I write books for a living, but I had stopped because the physical strain of typing had become too much. This process changed everything. It improved the quality of my writing, made me more productive than ever, and helped me feel joyful about writing again.

My AI Workflow

I used three AI tools: ChatGPT, ClaudeAI, and Raycast AI Pro. These tools didn’t just speed up the process; they worked as creative partners. The experience reminded me of the Beatles writing music together—tossing ideas back and forth, each tool adding bits and pieces, and mixing everything up until I created something I loved.

But let me be clear: this wasn’t a case of me typing, “ChatGPT, write me a 10,000-word book on bottlenecks in the style of Encyclopedia Brown crossed with a textbook.” Who’d want to read that? The AI didn’t write my book for me. I spent dozens of hours working hard—thinking, shaping, rewriting, and collaborating with the tools to create something I’m proud of. The tools amplified my creativity, but the effort was all mine.

• I used ChatGPT for big-picture edits and untangling tricky sections. I pasted in whole chapters, reviewed its suggestions, and refined my ideas with its input.

• I leaned on ClaudeAI to help shape the tone. I started with a strong detective-noir voice but found it too “detective-y.” With Claude, I reshaped it into something more thoughtful and wise, with just a hint of noir. This process of refining the tone felt like uncovering the voice my book needed.

• I relied on Raycast AI Pro for extra capacity when the other tools hit their limits. Raycast works beautifully on Mac, but since I often write on my iPhone or iPad, I needed Claude and ChatGPT to fill the gaps.

The flexibility of these subscriptions helped a lot. When I needed more capacity, I subscribed to both Claude and ChatGPT. Now that I’m finishing up, I’ll cancel one of them and scale back.

Building the Book, Step by Step

This book began as a simple email course. Writing in small, manageable chunks helped me build momentum and gather feedback. The course focused on a single foundational story, with each lesson adding cumulative layers of insight.

When I finished the course, I decided to turn it into a book. I uploaded the text into ChatGPT and worked through it chapter by chapter. I refined, expanded, and sometimes completely rethought sections to make the book as strong as possible.

At one point, the AI suggested adding rules to complement the lessons. We came up with 25 rules. I reviewed each one, kept the best, and rewrote them to match the tone and focus of the book. This collaborative editing process helped me structure the book while keeping it clear and practical.

Why Grammarly (and Word) Didn’t Work

After finishing the manuscript, I ran it through Grammarly, hoping for help with final touches. Grammarly didn’t offer anything useful. It flagged issues that didn’t exist and even claimed a simple scene about drinking coffee was plagiarized. Its suggestions felt like noise, not signal.

Microsoft Word’s grammar tools struggled too. Both tools couldn’t handle the conversational, unconventional style I had worked hard to create. I canceled Grammarly because it added no value to this process.

The Human Touch

My wife read the book and spotted a subtle but important issue that none of the AI tools flagged. Fixing it took 2–3 hours but made a big difference. My proofreader is now polishing the text further, catching details no machine could.

AI and Creativity: A Joyful Collaboration

AI didn’t just speed up my process. It helped me think more clearly and creatively. I spoke drafts into ChatGPT and Claude, explored their suggestions, and refined the ideas into something better. These tools helped me untangle confusing sections, clarify my thoughts, and polish the manuscript.

This time, I spent less time hunched over a keyboard. Instead, I focused on shaping ideas and creating something I felt proud of. The reduction in physical strain felt liberating.

One of the most delightful parts of this process involved Eleven Labs. I used it to turn the manuscript into an audiobook-in-progress, which let me listen to the book while biking in the fresh air. I played it at 1.5x speed, and the voice sounded better than many professional audiobooks. Hearing the book in this way gave me a new perspective and helped me spot issues I might have missed on the page.

What I Learned

• AI tools can transform the writing process, but they work best as collaborators. The back-and-forth editing made all the difference.

• Tools like Claude and ChatGPT handled creative styles beautifully, but Grammarly and Word couldn’t keep up.

• Subscriptions let me scale up when I needed more capacity and scale back when I didn’t.

• Eleven Labs gave me a brilliant way to review my work by listening to it while enjoying the outdoors.

• Human input still plays an essential role in catching subtleties and making final improvements.

Writing this way felt incredible. The process didn’t just make me more productive—it let me focus on what I love most about writing: sharing helpful ideas. I can’t tell you how happy it makes me to know that the ideas in this book will reach readers instead of staying stuck in my head.

If you want to know more about these tools or how I used them, I’m happy to share.

9 Likes
2

Is the above sharing written by you, or AI?

4 Likes
3

Both. Would you like to learn more about how I did it? I can share the ChatGPT discussion if you like. It start off with me talking to the built in voice recorder thingy for about 15 minutes.

2 Likes
4

Yes, Raycast AI integration is very convenient. Have you tried Raycast notes in the latest update? The best implementation of an ultra-simple note app that I have seen yet, having tried Tot and Sidenotes.

5

I have, but only a little. I’m not sure why I haven’t played more with their new notes feature yet - it looks great - but I suspect it’s because I’m waiting for their iPhone and iPad apps. I find it frustrating when I’m out and about with my iPhone and iPad but can’t find stuff then realise it’s only available on my Mac. That’s one of the frustrations with their AI too, but something I’m figuring out how to work around.

I do love Raycast, especially the iCloud sync since have 3 Macs, and it’s so easy to move between them. Can’t wait for the iOS version!

6

Congratulations on completing your book!

Your post is timely. I’ve been asked to conduct a two-day professional development workshop on AI in education. Although I have extensive background in technology in education, I’m still contemplating AI’s role in education and its best applications in both the business and instructional aspects of an educational institution. I plan to use your post as an example of how AI can be ethically and effectively utilized to assist in the writing process. I’ll certainly give proper attribution.

I’m particularly interested in your combination of using ChatGPT and Claude. You mentioned using ChatGPT for “big-picture edits and untangling tricky sections” and Claude “to help shape the tone.” What makes ChatGPT and Claude better suited for specific tasks? Why not use one exclusively instead of the other? In other words, why did you find ChatGPT more effective for big-picture edits and Claude more suitable for tone?

Any insights will be appreciated. Congratulations again on the completion of the book!

3 Likes
7

I would love to see it.

8

This sounds super interesting…and I like the direction you are headed which is about integrating and learning how to use AI (and teaching how to use AI) instead of just dismissing it or fighting it.

Like it or not, AI tools are here to stay. So how do we teach the next generation to use it ethically and effectively so that they can compete well in the workplace eventually?

1 Like
9

Interesting project, @Clarke_Ching, thanks for the report. I am curious about how this book will be received compared to any of your previous publications. It’s fine for us authors to say it felt good, but how is it actually received?

I have some questions, no obligation to answer:

  • What percentage of the work would you say is yours vs the machine’s? (My argument on this, btw, is that it is inseparable — no different than if you asked Senge what percentage of The Fifth Discipline was Word’s (or whatever he used): none, but then the book wouldn’t be the same if it was made with different tech)).
  • Did you describe your writing methods anywhere in the book? (No judgment either way. I’m ambiguous on this one. Academic writing styles seem to want authors to cite LLMs, which I think is manifestly wrong and unethical, as it gives LLMs authorship. Yet I do think it makes sense to explain LLM use as part of the methods used to develop new knowledge, for validity/reproducibility. One might argue that that’s silly when thinking about “ideation” tools, as no existing standard or culture encourages anyone to explain how they used a whiteboard in methods either, but I think that’s something we should explain too.)
  • Do you think this is the new normal? Put differently, do you think other authors in your field are at a disadvantage if they don’t use this approach?
  • Do you have any concerns about how this might affect your ability to write? Put differently: if you went through your early career doing writing this way, would you have achieved the same potential?

On education and AI: incidentally I’m running a second iteration of a workshop on AI and evaluation with my university this week (back by popular demand). Here’s some futures work I did on post-AI university education:

1 Like
10

Same here.      

11

Good questions! You got me thinking and I have taken quite a lot of time to answer, but I had help – See the link at the bottom

  1. How do you think this book will be received compared to any of your previous publications?

That’s a very hard question to answer because now that I’ve sent it off to the editor and announced it for pre-order, I’m in that in-between phase. I feel confident because I think the book is sharper, more engaging, and more thoughtfully crafted than my previous ones. My daughters loved the story when I read it to them, and the people who went through the email course it’s based on gave me fantastic feedback, which encouraged me to turn it into a book.

My eldest daughter, who edited the book, also gave me good feedback. When I asked if she’d feel embarrassed having her name on Amazon as the editor, she thought about it for a good 15 seconds before saying no. That feels like a good sign.

But don’t forget, I’ve spent a lot of time learning how to write. These tools haven’t replaced my skills; they’ve helped me write faster and, in some ways, better. I’ve had to work with them a lot—telling them what I like, what I don’t, and correcting things. There’s been a massive amount of work on my part, but the tools have taken care of the typing while I’ve focused on shaping the ideas.

So, we’ll see what people think when it’s out there. Fingers crossed!

  1. Did you describe your writing methods anywhere in the book?

I’ve gone out of my way to be open about using ChatGPT. I’ve written about it in my newsletter and on LinkedIn because I think it’s an incredibly helpful tool—not just for people like me who find sitting and typing physically challenging, but for anyone looking to enhance their thinking and writing process.

ChatGPT and I have had some fascinating, thought-provoking discussions, and some of those ideas have made it into the book. These tools have helped me create something I believe is high-quality and useful, which aligns with my goal of writing books that make the world a better place in some small way. Honestly, I regret that tools like this weren’t available earlier, as there have been times when I struggled to write the books I wanted to.

As for whether I mention my methods in the book itself, I haven’t decided yet. I don’t think it adds anything to the book’s purpose or value. I’d hate for someone to read the book, enjoy it, and then feel it was somehow less valuable because they misunderstood how I used the tools. Worse, I’d worry that mentioning it upfront might create a bias—like someone dismissing the book before they’ve even read it because they think ChatGPT wrote it. That’s not what happened.

The book wasn’t written by ChatGPT; it was written with ChatGPT. Every idea, direction, and refinement came from me. I worked hard to shape the content, tell it what I liked and didn’t like, and ensure everything fit together. The tools helped me type less, think more, and work faster, but the work itself is mine.

I don’t credit tools like Microsoft Word or its spellchecker when I use them, though they help improve the final product. Similarly, I don’t usually credit editors either, though I’ve offered, and they’ve politely declined. I see ChatGPT as a tool in the same way—one that helps me refine and enhance my work but doesn’t deserve authorship.

I know these tools will also lead to an avalanche of low-quality content, and that worries me. I suspect many people will use ChatGPT to churn out a lot of poor, rushed material. But I take pride in using it to create thoughtful, high-quality work that I believe makes the world a little better. It would be a shame if skilled, experienced writers avoided these tools because they wanted to stick to older methods. If that happened, and their voices got drowned out by lower-quality content, I think the world would be worse off for it.

  1. Do you think this is the new normal?

Yes, I do, but that’s only true for people wired like me. Some people love sitting down and typing away, and they can produce high-quality work quickly and fluently. For those writers, this approach might not add as much value.

I’m not like that. I find writing hard work—getting words onto the page, organizing my thoughts, and editing takes a lot of effort. These tools don’t just save me time; they make the process less exhausting and more productive. So, for writers like me, I think not using these tools could put them at a disadvantage.

  1. Do you have any concerns about how this might affect your ability to write?

That’s a really hard question to answer. It took me 10 years to write my first book—a full-blown business novel with textbook and business content wrapped inside the story. That book was 75,000 words, and I’m not sure the AI tools available now would have helped me write it. My current book is only 10,000 words, and these tools fit that kind of project perfectly. Maybe in five years, AI tools will evolve enough to assist with something as big and complex as my first book, but right now, I can’t imagine it.

One thing I’ve noticed is that these tools require constant feedback. For example, I have to remind ChatGPT to stick to active voice, and it goes back and corrects things. That’s something I had to learn to do the long, hard way when I wrote my first book. I’m not sure how much I would have learned about writing if I’d started my career with these tools. Then again, I was never a natural-born writer. I learned everything through years of effort.

That said, if I’d known back then how valuable writing short books could be, like the ones I write now, maybe these tools would have been a huge help. Perhaps they could have taught me to write better and faster, instead of me learning it the long, slow way.

Even now, I’m still using tools like ChatGPT to learn. Just yesterday, I spent time in the car using its advanced voice mode to help me understand cumulative sentences and how they differ from compound sentences. That was incredibly helpful. So, while I can’t say how these tools might have shaped my early career, I can confidently say they’re helping me improve as a writer now.

Here’s the link to the conversation I had with ChatGPT - both to write my original post and to answer your questions Ryan. . Most of the long bits of text were me talking. Some brain dumps, some editing and asking ChatGPT to fix things.

3 Likes
12

Would you consider shooting a short video showing us some of your process? I get the ideas on a theoretical level but not on the doing level.

Aside from your approach, I’ve also seen ProWritingAid and wondered about it’s utility.

By the way, Grammarly helped me with this post.

13

Thank you for sharing your dialogue with ChatGPT—it really helps me see how you use it as a tool for writing.

14

I don’t think there is anything special, but to be clear I started with me doing a long voice dump using the speech to text button.

15

I don’t think there is anything special, but to be clear I started with me doing a long voice dump using the speech to text button.

16

Your welcome. I’m muddling my through it.

17

I’m particularly interested in your combination of using ChatGPT and Claude. You mentioned using ChatGPT for “big-picture edits and untangling tricky sections” and Claude “to help shape the tone.” What makes ChatGPT and Claude better suited for specific tasks? Why not use one exclusively instead of the other? In other words, why did you find ChatGPT more effective for big-picture edits and Claude more suitable for tone?

I think I’m using both in the same way that doctors suggest you get a second opinion!

Just now Claude’s writing style seems to work better for the type of creative writing I was doing - a non-fiction book written kinda like a fiction book with a faux detector narrator who shares my name. I started out with ChatGPT but it wasn’t writing in the style I hoped and Claude took my text and did exactly what I wanted.

But then, sometimes, I take the words and chuck them at ChatGPT and ask it to make suggestions. Sometimes they’re great, sometimes not. But, the same is true with Claude.

Sometimes I think switching between them works like sometimes I need to work on one room and then I need to go work in another. Or maybe it’s more like when you spot mistakes on paper that you don’t see on a screen. Variety.

Part of it is capacity. Claude seems to tell me to go away and come back later often. ChatGPT doesn’t.

I’m muddling through this and the tech is changing all the time.

Not the most helpful answer!

18

If not for the initial draft recorded in your voice, I’d say you didn’t write the post yourself but rather guided someone else to write the post you wanted.

To me, your prompts sometimes suggested two different dynamics: you were directing someone else to write a text or you were collaborating with another author. In either case, it didn’t feel natural, from my perspective, for only your name to be listed as the author. If the AI were a person in this conversation, it would be the first author.

19

As for whether I mention my methods in the book itself, I haven’t decided yet. I don’t think it adds anything to the book’s purpose or value. I’d hate for someone to read the book, enjoy it, and then feel it was somehow less valuable because they misunderstood how I used the tools. Worse, I’d worry that mentioning it upfront might create a bias—like someone dismissing the book before they’ve even read it because they think ChatGPT wrote it. That’s not what happened.

I applaud you for your honesty in describing what you’ve done on this forum.

In my view, you most certainly should extend the same courtesy to the potential readers of your book, who after all will be parting with their money.

As for creating ‘bias’: that’s a peculiar way of looking at it, isn’t it?

It is not ‘bias’ for a reader to have a view on the appropriateness of using AI in such a way: at best, there are serious legal and ethical considerations still to be considered. It may be that one day the use of AI for such purposes will be wholly uncontroversial, but that’s still a long way off. In the meantime, don’t you think you should allow your potential readers a genuine choice, rather than deceiving them by omission?

2 Likes
20

I am interested in how this book reads, now that I know the background. I have just preordered it at stupidly low price of 77p!

@Clarke_Ching I admire your openness aound the development of the book. I know quite a few writers who use AI in a similar manner to you. Using AI not to write the final words, but more as a creative colleague.