Operating model and accountable decisions
AI Governance & Use-Case Portfolio
An AI operating model and use-case portfolio with owners, approval rules and recurring reviews.
Design an AI operating model connecting business, HR, IT and risk. Clarify decision rights, accountable ownership and portfolio management from proposal to everyday operation. Define agent action boundaries, permissions, approvals and evidence, with recurring reviews of value, work impacts and safeguards.
Three key deliverables
- AI operating model with decision rights across business, HR, IT and risk
- Shared use-case portfolio with accountable owners and dependencies
- Review routines for value, work impacts and pilot, change, scale or retire decisions
Best fit
AI use is spreading across teams, but ownership, approval rights and review routines are unclear.
What we need to begin
- A sponsor able to bring business, HR, IT and risk into shared decisions.
- Access to existing policies, use cases, tools, data categories, jurisdictions and approval responsibilities.
What you receive
AI operating model with decision rights across business, HR, IT and risk
Shared use-case portfolio with accountable owners and dependencies
Review routines for value, work impacts and pilot, change, scale or retire decisions
Decision and control records with permissions, oversight and exception paths
Use-case record
UC / 01 · Customer-support drafting
- Accountable owner
- Customer-support lead
- Decision
- Pilot proposal, pending approval
- Data and dependencies
- Approved guidance, de-identified questions and read/draft permissions in an authorised workspace. Sending replies and modifying customer records are outside the agent’s authority.
- Evidence required
- Source-linked drafts, corrections, approval records, denied-action tests and evidence of pause, revoked access and recovery.
Illustrative examples · Customer-support drafting
A use case needs decisions throughout its life.
Follow customer-support drafting from a proposal to a recurring portfolio review. Open a stage to see who decides and what evidence is needed.
01Proposal
- Accountable owner
- Customer-support lead
- Decision
- Accept the business question for assessment.
- Evidence required
- Purpose, intended actions, authorising owner, expected benefit and manual alternative.
02Assessment
- Accountable owner
- Business owner with privacy, security and procurement reviewers
- Decision
- Assess value and feasibility; resolve risk, permission and supplier conditions separately.
- Evidence required
- Data inventory, tool permissions, authority limits, sourcing options, risk reviews and business-case assumptions.
03Pilot approval
- Accountable owner
- Designated approval authority
- Decision
- Approve only the bounded pilot and its conditions, or defer it.
- Evidence required
- Approved data, reviewer, allowed and prohibited actions, approval boundaries, acceptance and stop criteria.
04Evaluation
- Accountable owner
- Workflow owner and human reviewer
- Decision
- Compare evidence and recommend continue, change, scale or retire.
- Evidence required
- Total effort, corrections, quality and tests of allowed/denied actions, pause, revoked access and recovery.
05Operation
- Accountable owner
- Business owner with technical delivery owner
- Decision
- Authorise the agreed operating scope after implementation and specialist validation.
- Evidence required
- Validated permissions, approval events, action logs, pause and revocation routes, recovery and reauthorisation.
06Review
- Accountable owner
- Portfolio sponsor and use-case owners
- Decision
- Review benefits, dependencies and incidents; continue, change, scale or retire.
- Evidence required
- Action-completion evidence, control-effectiveness checks, supplier changes, updated register and reassessment before changed operation.
Change and reassess
- Decision
- Reassess material changes in purpose, data, tools, permissions, autonomy, supplier or model before changed operation. The authorising owner approves the revised scope.
- Evidence required
- Change record, revised authority limits, technical validation and repeated approval, denial, revocation and recovery tests.
Retire and close
- Decision
- Retire when value, safety or support no longer justifies continued use. The business owner approves the transition.
- Evidence required
- Reason, replacement or manual fallback, access removal, data handling and supplier exit evidence.
Fictional scenarios to explain the method. Positions are assumptions, not measured results or approval to use AI.
How the work unfolds
Map the operating model and register: connect each use to accountable and authorising owners, intended value, role impacts, permitted and prohibited actions, tool and data permissions, suppliers and evidence.
Agree decision rights and coordination across business, HR, IT and risk. Define proposal, assessment, pilot approval, evaluation, operation and review evidence, including change and retirement.
Rehearse a portfolio review: check results, workload, completed actions and control effectiveness. Reassess material changes in purpose, tools, data, model, supplier or autonomy before changed operation.
Your team’s contribution
Business and HR leads, workflow owners, IT and risk reviewers test responsibilities against real scenarios. Legal, privacy and security specialists validate requirements within their remit; leadership resolves ownership and resource decisions.
Timing and review points
The sequence depends on policy maturity, jurisdictions and the availability of decision-makers. Drafting, review and approval milestones are agreed in the proposal.
How the fee is scoped
Scope is driven by the number of policies, use cases, jurisdictions, stakeholders and review rounds. Fees are proposed after intake; there is no assumed fixed package price.
Where responsibilities sit
Ada Studio supports governance design and adoption. Client leadership retains employment and resource decisions. Formal legal interpretation, technical enforcement and final approvals remain with the client and appointed specialists.