Free tool
Where does your board stand on AI accountability?
Your one-page summary is emailed to you and shared with the Governance AI team to prepare for your call.
Awareness at the top
Do your directors understand what they're being asked to govern? Knowledge, language, ownership.
Individual directors have completed a short AI awareness check.
A quick quiz showing what each director understands and where confidence is low.
The board has had an AI maturity snapshot, even informal.
A one-page view of strengths and gaps across people, process, technology and risk.
You have identified your main AI risks.
Data leakage, inaccurate outputs, bias, cyber attack, supplier failure, with owners.
There is a named AI lead at executive or board level.
Someone accountable for AI and reporting to the board. Not the IT director by default.
Your leaders know the basics of current rules and standards.
Direction of travel on the EU AI Act, UK guidance and ISO 42001. No need to be lawyers.
The board has the skills and mindset to guide AI-driven change.
Change experience plus the confidence to challenge assumptions and ask hard questions.
The chair sets the tone on AI proactively, not reactively.
Starts conversations before incidents force them, and invites outside perspectives in.
Honest diagnosis
You can't fix what you can't see. An objective picture of where you actually are, beyond gut feel.
Each core function has been asked how it uses or wants to use AI.
A light survey across Finance, HR, Customer Service, Sales, IT, Legal and Operations.
Those inputs have been pulled into a single enterprise view.
One summary of common needs and priorities, not a stack of departmental memos.
You have in-house help for AI and automation, even part-time.
A named person who can run pilots and support colleagues. Not a quarterly consultant.
There is a simple AI roadmap with milestones and owners.
A 3 to 6 month plan, names against tasks, and a date for board review.
You have compared yourself against a standard or peer benchmark.
An external benchmark or assessment. Self-belief is not a benchmark.
The board has the right information to oversee AI decisions.
Board papers have depth on AI; all functions feed in, not just IT.
You are measuring the right things on AI.
Dashboards reflect outcomes and context, not just activity.
Guardrails in place
The basics written down, owned, and known to staff. Without these, every AI conversation starts from scratch.
There is an AI Steering Group with terms of reference and a meeting rhythm.
A small cross-functional group with clear responsibilities and a line to the board.
There is an AI strategy or charter approved by leadership.
Aims, risk approach, and where you will and won't use AI. Signed off, not just drafted.
You have an AI usage policy people can find and follow.
Simple rules on tools, data handling and transparency. A living document, not a buried PDF.
You keep a register of AI tools and use cases.
A live list of what's in use, why, what data is involved, who owns it, and what's been checked.
AI training is available and being taken up.
Short, practical sessions on safe use and role-specific skills, for staff and leaders.
There is clarity on roles, responsibilities and mandates for AI.
Oversight explicitly assigned across committees and board; AI is on the agenda.
Value showing up
Governance without value is theatre. Is AI doing useful work yet, and are you set up to keep going?
You use, or pilot, a chatbot for staff or customers.
An assistant that answers common questions and reduces repetitive load.
You use, or pilot, voice assistants or phone agents.
Tools that take or route calls, or create call summaries automatically.
You have automated at least one routine business process.
Software that moves information, drafts documents, or triggers approvals without re-keying.
Staff routinely use AI assistants for email or knowledge work.
Drafting, summarising, meeting notes, first-cut reports, with permission and policy behind it.
Teams use research or report assistants for data and insights.
Tools that pull data together and produce first drafts for human review.
You have run a low-risk, high-impact AI pilot to a measurable result.
An experiment that saved time or cost without touching sensitive data, with numbers.
The board itself uses new technology to improve how it works.
AI in its own meetings and papers, and open to learning from experimentation.
Foundations and impact
Data, security, suppliers, and the question that matters: is the board enabling adaptation, or holding it back?
You have a basic data and cyber picture for AI.
Where key data lives, who can access it, known risks, and whether DPIAs are done for new tools.
Your risk framework covers AI-specific risks.
Register and appetite reflect bias, model drift, supplier failure, prompt injection, data poisoning.
Procurement asks meaningful AI questions of new vendors.
Due diligence covers AI claims, training data, model provenance, security testing, incident history.
The board understands how you create value in an AI-powered world.
Shared view of the business model and competitive advantage, and how AI helps or threatens each.
The board has agreed what success on AI looks like in 2 to 3 years.
Defined success, agreed a path, and discussed how the board's own role will evolve.
Staff would say the board enables AI adoption, not slows it.
People see clear direction and support, with visible evidence the board listens and adjusts.
Your result
Start of the Journey
Answer all 33 questions and your starting point on the Journey appears here.
Answer all 33 to download your summary, 33 to go.
How to use it
- Mark Yes only if you would defend the answer in front of a regulator, an investor or a journalist.
- In progress is honest, not a hedge: it usually means someone has started but no one has owned it.
- Bring the completed summary to a 30-minute call. We map it to the Governance AI Journey and scope the right next step.
Find out where your AI exposure sits.
We'll tell you plainly what's worth doing, what isn't, and what a board or regulator will expect to see. No pitch deck.
No obligation · no pitch.