AI Confidence for Boards
Board-level clarity on AI strategy and adoption
Secret Sauce gives directors an independent view of whether the organisation is governing AI well, and is prepared for the strategic change AI will bring.
The board dilemma
Every board is having a difficult AI conversation
Some directors want to move faster, worried competitors are pulling ahead. Others want to slow down, wary of the risks. Others simply don't feel they know enough about AI to call it either way.
We help boards build confidence their AI strategy is asking the right questions, and their AI plans balance opportunity, execution and risk as the environment continues to change.
Be confident in your AI strategy, and how AI is being governed
Whether you need a quick sense-check or a more comprehensive independent review, we can tailor the level of support to what your board needs.
Strategy
Is the plan sound?
Adoption
Is it working today?
Board confidence
Strategic AI Review
Evidence-informed and qualitative
What it is
We test whether management and the board have looked hard enough at how AI could reshape customer behaviour, competitive position and the business model itself, and what a sensible response looks like.
What we do
See a snippet of the report →
Strategic consideration at a glance
No area was assessed as adequately considered within the evidence reviewed.
Customer value
Principal gap — Changing buying criteria and willingness to pay
Industry economics
Principal gap — Pricing, margin and staffing leverage
Competitive boundaries
Principal gap — AI-native, adjacent and customer-led alternatives
Defensible advantage
Principal gap — Durability of trust, knowledge and professional judgement
Illustrative sample from a Strategic AI Review.
AI Adoption Assessment
Evidence-based and rated
What it is
We rate the evidence of management's maturity in how it invests in, measures, governs and manages the risk of AI adoption, including the data integrity, usage guardrails and technical readiness boards expect but rarely see tested.
What we do
See a snippet of the report →
AI Adoption Profile
Investment
Repeatable
Value
Developing
Capability
Developing
Organisational readiness
Developing
Governance
Repeatable
Risk
Repeatable
Board question
Are AI uses visible and supported by suitable data, approved tools and repeatable operating processes?
Evidence reviewed
Data · Tools · Procurement · Implementation · Operations
Independent finding
Central processes are more developed than local and embedded AI practices.
Every dimension expands the same way, shown here for Organisational readiness.
Start wherever makes sense for your board.
There's no fixed package to choose. Pick the scope that answers your question, and it becomes a baseline you can revisit each quarter.
Choose a starting point
A
Strategic AI Review
Is the board's strategic thinking on AI sound?
B
AI Adoption Assessment
Is AI adoption working well today?
C
Both, combined
The full Board AI Baseline, strategy and adoption together.
D
A custom review
Scoped to the specific question you're trying to answer.
Then, review it every quarter
Your baseline
Whichever option you chose
Review
Repeats each quarter
Quarterly reviews track movement across the same dimensions, so the board sees what's changed, not just where things stand today. A one-off review is valuable on its own; boards that keep going get the clearest picture.
Led by someone who's sat where you sit
Steve leads every review personally. He brings more than a decade on boards, including as Deputy Chair and Chair of the Audit, Finance and Risk Committee. As Venture Partner at Antler, one of the world's most active AI investors, he has direct visibility into what is shifting at the frontier. He's also taken four companies to Series A and led AI implementation across 50+ businesses.
Let's connect on LinkedIn →"Steve helped us bring together a large and diverse body of evidence, using AI to identify the themes that mattered and test our strategic options more rigorously. His combination of commercial judgement, AI understanding and constructive challenge is improving the quality and efficiency of our strategic planning."
Katie Lyndon
CEO
Exercise & Sports Science Australia
Upcoming: AICD
Steve is speaking to Australian directors on AI governance
The same Board AI Confidence thinking behind this page, presented to the AICD community.
See the details and register →Questions boards ask us
Do we need to choose one of the pre-defined services?
No. These are examples of common ways we work with boards, not fixed packages or required starting points. We can tailor the scope to the question you are trying to answer, whether that is a short board session, a focused piece of advice, a workshop, or a more detailed independent review. If you are unsure what you need, contact us. A short conversation is often the best place to start.
We're not ready for a full review. Do you offer a preliminary assessment?
Yes. We can tailor a preliminary assessment to your needs. For example, this might involve structured interviews with the Chair, CEO and selected leaders in areas such as technology and HR. It provides an initial view based on management perspectives, without the documentary evidence-testing required for a full review. Contact us to discuss the right scope.
How do you complete the AI Adoption Assessments?
Assessments are completed primarily through structured interviews with directors and management, guided by our methodology and supported by targeted evidence across six dimensions. For example, the Organisational Readiness dimension examines whether AI use is visible and supported by suitable data, approved tools, procurement checks, implementation disciplines and repeatable operating processes. The Capability dimension assesses if the organisation has the leadership, AI literacy and specialist capacity to evaluate outputs, oversee human judgement and manage change.
Is this a governance audit?
No. Our services are designed to give directors confidence in their AI programs and help them work together with management teams to close any gaps. We review the maturity of your AI governance processes, relative to your company size, complexity and the stage of your AI adoption.
How does this compare to formal AI governance standards, like ISO42001?
These standards provide a valuable framework for an AI management system, especially for large enterprises and technology vendors. Our service helps mid-market boards address a broader question: whether AI is being adopted well, delivering value and receiving sufficient strategic consideration. We help translate frameworks into practical and fit-for-purpose processes. It can support ISO readiness, but does not replace formal conformance assessment or certification.
Will these reviews create a separate risk management framework for AI?
No. For mid-market organisations we recommend using your existing risk management framework and procedures, updated with specific AI risks such as data quality, privacy and sovereignty, IP leakage, reliability, human oversight and vendor dependence.
How do you complete the AI Strategic Outlook reviews?
The Strategic Outlook Review is led through structured interviews with the CEO and Chair or another director, supported by relevant strategy, board and external evidence. Where the initial enquiry identifies material gaps or uncertainty, we typically use an in-person or remote board workshop to test assumptions, broaden perspectives and agree matters requiring further attention.
If AI went wrong tomorrow, would you have seen it coming?
Share a few details about your board and we'll set up an initial conversation.
Start a conversation