Oversight and governance
The control documentation, checkpoints and accountability map a senior manager needs before putting their name to an automated process.
The hardest part of automating compliance work is not building it. It is being able to explain it — to internal audit, to a board committee, to an ODD team, and eventually to a regulator.
Accountability cannot be outsourced to an algorithm, and a review of the Senior Managers Regime is currently examining how individual accountability operates where AI performs functions that were previously subject to direct human oversight. Nobody has published the answer. In the meantime, the defensible position is documentary: show where the automation stops, who decides, and how you would know if it went wrong.
We produce that documentation as part of every build. Where a firm already has automation in place, we can do this as a standalone review.
What you get
- A control map for each automated workflow: inputs, processing steps, control points, human checkpoints, outputs, and failure modes
- Accountability mapping to the relevant senior management function, in language suitable for a statement of responsibilities
- Model and tool inventory, with intended use, limitations and validation approach recorded for each
- Escalation and override design — how a person intervenes, and how the intervention is recorded
- Monitoring of the monitoring: sampling, exception review and periodic assurance over the automated processes themselves
- Board and committee reporting on AI use, written for a non-technical audience