AI Governance & ISO Readiness
For organisations where AI adoption is moving faster than ownership, controls and evidence.
AI that can scale with clear accountability and evidence.
33 ISO 27001 findings closed, including 13 High/Very High, and IAM/PAM governance experience at approximately 40,000-user scale.
Experience from prior enterprise leadership roles.
When AI adoption outruns accountability and evidence
Governance becomes credible when ownership, inventory, risk/impact assessment, controls and evidence are connected to how AI is actually used.
AI use cases are being launched faster than ownership is being defined.
Human approval and exception boundaries are unclear.
Risk, control and evidence practices differ by team.
ISO/IEC 42001 readiness is required but roles and evidence are fragmented.
Governance artifacts leaders can operate and evidence
The goal is a practical operating model and prioritized readiness path, not a policy library detached from day-to-day use.
Inventory. Assess. Design. Ready.
Inventory
Establish what AI use cases exist, where they operate, who owns them and what evidence is available.
Assess
Evaluate risk, impact, identity/access, human oversight and readiness gaps.
Design
Define roles, governance, control ownership, escalation and evidence requirements.
Ready
Prioritise remediation and readiness actions; bring in accredited or technical specialists where formal assurance requires them.
Where specialist assurance begins
Execution Clarity does not issue certifications, claim Lead Auditor authority or replace legal counsel. Formal certification and specialist technical assurance are partner-led where required.
The thinking behind the work
Make governance visible in operating decisions: what AI is in use, who is accountable, what is permitted, when a human intervenes and what evidence is retained. Readiness work should connect the relevant management-system and impact-assessment requirements to the organisation’s actual systems and responsibilities.
Read our perspective: AI governance has to work beyond the policy documentBring the problem that is hardest to make clear.
The first conversation is about the problem and whether there is a useful, bounded next step — not about forcing a pre-packaged engagement.