The short answer
Yes, you may in principle organize information provision about AI to your employees yourself. The AI Regulation does not prescribe a fixed course, certificate or external party. What the Regulation does require is that employees who work with an AI system or make decisions about it have sufficient knowledge and skills to use that system responsibly, appropriate to their role and to the system itself.
The boundary between doing it yourself and outsourcing does not lie in the question of whether you are allowed to do it yourself, but in the question of whether you can substantiate and appropriately implement it. With a simple tool, such as a chatbot for customer enquiries, an internal briefing is often sufficient. With systems that have greater impact on people, for example in recruitment or staff appraisal, the bar is higher and it is advisable to bring in expertise or have it assessed.
What the Regulation does and does not prescribe
The AI Regulation imposes a duty of care on organisations using AI systems: they must ensure that relevant staff have sufficient AI literacy. This concept is deliberately broad: it is about understanding what the system does, what limitations and risks it has, and how the results are used responsibly. The text prescribes no particular form. A brief internal instruction, an e-learning, a work meeting with documentation: it can all work, as long as it matches the system and the role of the employee working with it.
Where it becomes less flexible is in the question of whether an AI system falls into a higher risk category. That assessment requires knowledge of the Regulation itself and of how the system is precisely deployed. That is a different step from providing information, and that step is less suitable for "figuring it out yourself". Anyone in doubt about whether a system in practice involves more than it appears to can, get an initial indication with a few questions before further steps are taken.
Doing it yourself: what this involves
If you organize the information provision yourself, it is advisable to record who has had what training, when that was and what was covered. Not because the Regulation requires a specific document, but because in a check or when questioned by a supervisory authority you must be able to demonstrate that you have taken action on this. A note in a personnel file or an internal memo is for many companies already a practical basis.
Also bear in mind that information provision about AI can overlap with existing labour law. When an AI system affects the work of employees, for example because it monitors performance or redistributes tasks, the works council may have a right of approval under existing employee participation rules. That process is separate from the AI Regulation itself, but in practice often becomes relevant at the same time. An overview of how these subjects intersect can be found in the knowledge bank, compiled for each situation.
When external advice is worthwhile
External advice becomes especially worthwhile at two points. First, in the classification of an AI system: does it fall under a category with additional obligations, and what does that mean concretely for your organisation. That is legal clarification, not information provision, and so belongs with a lawyer or the competent supervisory authority. Second, with systems supplied by a vendor and where you do not yourself know exactly how they work internally: in that case the conversation with that vendor is often the first step, not the internal training.
For companies uncertain about where they stand, it is useful to first clarify the distinction between these steps: providing information, assessing risks and complying with obligations are three separate things that are often confused. Frequently asked questions about this, with brief and direct answers, are collected on the frequently asked questions page.
Finally
Whether to arrange information for staff yourself depends on the system, the employee's role and what you want to demonstrably achieve with it. There is no fixed formula, and the regulation deliberately leaves room for your own interpretation. If you are unsure whether your situation goes beyond an internal explanation, that is a question for a lawyer or the supervisory authority, not something to decide on a whim.
Do you first want an indication of where your organisation stands, before you plan a training or advisory meeting? Take the free quick-scan or read further at your leisure via the explanation of how our information is produced.