Intake & document review
Review the AI policy environment, model and use-case inventory, vendor agreements, prior incidents or near misses, and risk-committee terms of reference.
A fixed-scope, three-week AI governance exposure assessment that gives your board a defensible answer before failure becomes consequence.
For boards, general counsel, risk leaders, and executive teams in banking, insurance, energy, utilities, telecom, and other high-consequence institutions.
The Diagnostic returns a board-ready view of the five decision domains: governance, technical controls, third-party exposure, incident readiness, and board visibility—alongside clear priorities and accountable next actions.
Most institutions can describe what their AI systems do. Few can tell their board what happens when one fails.
The ICC Diagnostic is a fixed-scope assessment designed to turn an abstract AI governance conversation into a visible institutional exposure picture, clear decision rights, and a prioritized action plan. It is not a generic maturity-model exercise. It is a board-facing review of what your institution can defend under pressure.
Review the AI policy environment, model and use-case inventory, vendor agreements, prior incidents or near misses, and risk-committee terms of reference.
Conduct five to eight structured conversations with the leaders who carry the decision: board, executive, legal, technology, security, and AI-deployment owners.
Apply the Institutional Crisis Compass across governance, controls, third parties, incident readiness, and board visibility—where AI risk becomes institutional consequence.
Deliver a concise board-ready report: exposure heat map, sector context, and five to seven prioritized recommendations tied to practical remediation effort.
Present the assessment in a 90-minute board or executive session, clarifying decision rights, action owners, and the next control cadence.
Can the institution show who approves, challenges, pauses, overrides, and accepts residual AI risk?
Do policy, testing, monitoring, and escalation create an operating control record—not a paper program?
Where do models, vendors, data, cloud, access, and concentration risk create dependencies outside the institution’s control?
What happens when a system fails, a vendor changes terms, a regulator asks, or an AI-enabled event reaches the board?
Can directors see the exposure clearly enough to exercise informed oversight before the decision window closes?
The scope is intentionally fixed so a board chair, general counsel, or executive sponsor can approve a serious diagnostic without beginning a broad consulting procurement process.
For institutions that need continuing board visibility, the Compass Monitor provides a quarterly re-score and a standing line for board questions between cycles.
The Institutional Crisis Compass Diagnostic provides advisory and decision support. It is not legal advice, a compliance certification, or a substitute for an institution’s own legal, regulatory, security, or risk obligations.
Share the institution, the question, and a few times that work. Khaos will review the request and respond directly to arrange the right conversation.