Do you have AI governance, or AI theatre?
An eight-minute diagnostic across five dimensions of continuous-evidence readiness: trace pipeline, framework coverage, incident readiness, taxonomy clarity, sequencing posture. Sequencing-aware, so wrong-stage buyers are routed back to Adoption.
A composite score, a sector cohort, and a sequencing-aware result.
A benchmarked score
Composite out of 25, with a per-dimension read on each of the five dimensions. Email gate at the result, not before.
A sector comparison
Plotted against a finance cohort. Private Equity, Banks and Capital Markets, Fintech, Asset and Wealth, REITs and Real Estate, Insurance.
A discovery option
Optional 30-minute call. We walk the result, name the governance work that’s premature versus the audit work that lands today, and decide the right sequence.
Ready to walk the result? Book a discovery call.
Get in touch →Questions buyers actually ask.
The degree to which a governance program produces timestamped, sourced, versioned evidence as a byproduct of production AI operation, rather than assembling evidence at audit time. ISO 42001 management-system review remains periodic; behavioral assurance does not.
Sequencing posture measures whether governance work is ordered correctly relative to Adoption, Transformation, and Fluency. Most governance programs run ahead of adoption, producing controls for AI that isn't yet in production. The result is shelfware. Weak sequencing posture routes the buyer to the AI Audit and Maturity Assessment first, not the Governance engagement.
Because boards pressure CIOs to adopt AI, and the conversation stalls at adoption, which tools, who's using them, is it paying off. Governance demand only crystallizes once an organization has enough AI in production to have something to lose. Selling governance to a Stage 1 or 2 buyer fails silently.
ISO 42001 is a management-system standard, periodic certification (typically annual) is appropriate for the management-system question. The behavioral question, 'is this AI behaving correctly today?', requires continuous evaluation. Most mature programs run both: periodic ISO certification plus a continuous-evidence pipeline feeding the periodic review.
SR 11-7 expects ongoing model performance monitoring, validation, and remediation, language that maps cleanly onto continuous evaluation for non-deterministic AI. The scorecard's Framework coverage dimension scores SR 11-7 mapping for banking and large financial institutions; the Continuous evidence pipeline dimension scores the trace pipeline.
Continuous evidence pipeline, Framework coverage (ISO 42001 / NIST AI RMF / EU AI Act / AIUC-1 / SR 11-7), Incident readiness, Three-way taxonomy clarity (frameworks vs. regulations vs. guidelines), and Sequencing posture. Sequencing posture is load-bearing, without it the scorecard regresses to governance-first marketing.