Questions we hear most

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

No. Policies describe intent. We assess evidence: what management is actually doing, how well it is working, and whether the board has tested its strategic assumptions.

No. The Baseline is a fixed, evidence-based engagement with a clear end point: a rating, a set of findings and a prioritised roadmap. Ongoing review is optional and set at quarterly intervals, not continuous.

We aren't paid by software vendors, and where we've delivered an implementation ourselves, we don't assess that work. Either it's excluded from scope, or reviewed by someone else.

The relevant implementation work is excluded from the assessment scope, or reviewed by another qualified party, so the board still gets an independent view.

Typically a small number of weeks, combining director and executive interviews, evidence review and a facilitated board workshop. We scope the exact timeline in the first conversation.