We help senior responsible owners, accounting officers, and executive teams answer one hard question before AI-influenced decisions are challenged:
Who held authority — and can we evidence it?
Making accountability explicit at the moment AI influences public-facing decisions — not reconstructed after complaints, audits, or inquiries.
Designed to support existing statutory, policy, and assurance frameworks — not replace them.
Typically when AI is already influencing outcomes and the organisation wants assurance before a complaint, audit, incident, or inquiry forces the question. Chairs commission an Authority Validation Sprint when they need independent, decision-time clarity on who holds authority, where escalation and override operate in practice, and whether existing governance would stand up to external scrutiny — without waiting for a failure to expose gaps.
Chairs and Accounting Officers typically commission an Authority Validation Sprint when one or more of the following pressures are emerging — even if no formal issue has yet arisen:
In these situations, Chairs often seek a short, independent validation to confirm whether decision authority is genuinely operating as intended, before external scrutiny requires that clarity.