Acuity AI Advisory

Governance

AI Governance Advisory

Governance frameworks that are built and deployed — not handed over and hoped for.

Ungoverned AI creates regulatory exposure, reputational risk, and operational fragility. Governed AI outperforms it on every dimension that matters. The difference is not the quality of the policy document — it is whether the accountability structures are actually in place and working.

Ger Perdisatt presenting at Danske Bank

ISO/IEC 42001:2023 — Lead Auditor certified

Acuity governance frameworks are aligned to ISO/IEC 42001:2023, the international management system standard for AI. Lead Auditor certification independently verified by Mastermind Assurance. What that means in practice →

Most organisations don't know what AI they're running. Governance starts there.

When AI governance fails, it's rarely because the policies were wrong. It's because no one knew which systems were in use, who owned them, or what decisions they were making. The diagnostic work almost always precedes the governance work.

Scope

What AI governance means in practice

An AI governance engagement with Acuity starts with how your organisation actually uses AI — not with a generic framework applied from the outside. We map what is in use, identify the risks and obligations that apply, build the accountability structures and policies that hold, and deploy them. The output is operational infrastructure, not a shelf document.

What gets built and deployed

AI use inventory across the organisation
Risk classification against EU AI Act categories
Accountability structures — who owns what, at what level
Oversight policies and escalation mechanisms
Tool assessment process for AI before deployment
Board-level and operational-level governance addressed together
Regulatory alignment across EU AI Act, GDPR, and sector-specific obligations (DORA where applicable)

Regulation

Why this matters now

Ireland's AI Office becomes fully operational in August 2026. For organisations deploying high-risk AI systems — which includes AI in HR decisions, credit, insurance, and customer-facing automated processes — documented governance is a legal obligation, not best practice.

Boards and executives are being asked to sign off on AI systems without the frameworks to evaluate them. Organisations that build governance now are separating themselves from those that will be forced to retrofit it later under regulatory pressure.

AI Office of Ireland — 1 August 2026. Enforcement powers active. High-risk AI systems require documented governance and oversight. The time to build the framework is before the inspection, not after.

€560k
Margin recovered in seven days
Food distributor — existing systems, no new software
85%
Reporting time reduction
Finance team — 39 hrs monthly to 3–5 hrs
1,525
Automatable hours identified per year
Professional services firm — revenue debt recovery

Proof

What this has looked like in practice

Energy investment firm

Three business functions, no consistent governance, two days of monthly manual effort to produce the management board report. Acuity ran five stakeholder sessions under Chatham House rules, ran governance and opportunity assessment in parallel, redesigned the reporting cycle, and delivered a full governance framework — AI policy, three-stage tool assessment toolkit, regulatory alignment across EU AI Act, DORA, and GDPR — operational within four weeks.

Newly-established state regulator

Seventeen people, no CIO, hard statutory deadline (compulsory information powers from December 2026). Adversarial risk was the real concern: submissions engineered to exhaust processing capacity. Acuity designed and delivered a full board and senior leadership session, stress-tested a 2027 enforcement scenario in the room, and produced three frameworks — all adversarially tested through competing AI systems before delivery. Three frameworks adopted into the IoD Ireland national director education programme.

PRA/FCA-regulated Nordic bank

Six intelligence gaps mapped, single architecture designed to address all of them. Head of Communications: “You couldn’t have done better. Absolutely nailed it.”

See all case studies →

Questions

Common questions

What is an AI governance framework?

An AI governance framework is the set of policies, accountability structures, oversight mechanisms, and risk controls that determine how AI is used, monitored, and held to account within an organisation. It covers who is responsible for AI decisions, how AI systems are reviewed before deployment, what happens when AI causes harm, and how compliance is maintained. A governance framework is not a one-off document — it is operational infrastructure. Acuity builds it and deploys it. The engagement ends when it is working, not when the document is filed.

Do Irish companies legally need an AI governance policy?

For organisations deploying high-risk AI systems — which includes AI in HR, credit decisioning, insurance, and customer-facing automated decisions — a governance policy is a legal obligation under the EU AI Act. Ireland's AI Office is fully operational from August 2026, after which enforcement is active. For lower-risk AI use, governance is a significant liability and reputational safeguard. The practical question is not whether to have governance — it is whether yours will hold up when tested.

How long does an AI governance review take?

A structured governance review typically runs four to six weeks from initial diagnostic to a deployed governance framework. The NTR engagement — three business functions, full framework including policy, tool assessment toolkit, and regulatory alignment — was operational within four weeks. Timeline depends on the complexity of your AI use and the number of systems in scope.

Can you build a governance framework for a non-technical organisation?

Yes — and most of our clients are non-technical organisations. Professional services firms, financial institutions, state bodies, regulated entities. Governance frameworks are built around your actual operations. The language, structures, and accountability mechanisms are designed for the people who will use them. Technical understanding is not a prerequisite.

Does my board need a dedicated AI governance committee?

For organisations with significant AI deployment, regulated sector status, or active AI development, a dedicated sub-committee of the audit and risk committee — quarterly, with defined terms of reference — is the minimum structure that provides credible governance evidence. For organisations with modest, low-risk AI use, a structured AI agenda item on the audit committee may be sufficient, provided the minutes reflect genuine challenge rather than a management update.

Request an AI Governance Assessment

A structured conversation about your current AI use, your regulatory exposure, and what governance would actually look like for your organisation.