COMPANY BRAIN
CONTROL ROUTE / READINESS

Make the governance story reviewable before you need it.

Company Brain supports the knowledge-governance part of AI compliance-readiness: accountable ownership, source traceability, human review and evidence of change control.

Bring this workflow to a scope call →
BUILT FOR

AI governance leads, risk and compliance teams, legal operations, model-risk and internal-control owners.

STARTING POINT

One consequential answer, not a whole-document migration.

WHAT CHANGES

A source change becomes a visible business decision.

THE DECISION TO GOVERN

Make one answer
defensible.

For a consequential AI answer, can you show the source, owner, change record and human decision that made it usable in that workflow?

01 / WORKFLOWA policy-heavy AI use case where business guidance changes and a named governance owner needs to decide what an assistant may rely on.
02 / SOURCE + OWNERConnect the authoritative material to the person accountable for its use.
03 / CHANGE + REVIEWWhen the material changes, route the affected answer to a named review decision.
04 / RELEASE + RECORDA governed knowledge route with source lineage, ownership, reviewer decisions, change events and a record of the answer state released to the workflow.
WHERE TO START

Three useful
first routes.

Choose one that already has a real owner, a source of truth and a consequence when the answer goes stale.

01

AI use-case inventory

Start with one consequential workflow and document the answer type, source, owner, reviewer and the action the user may take from it.

02

Policy change control

When a policy or procedure changes, hold the affected answer state for review instead of allowing a silent stale answer to persist.

03

Internal evidence pack

Export the control story for risk, legal, internal audit or a customer diligence conversation without calling it a compliance certificate.

WHAT A BUYER CAN EXAMINE

Not a claim.
A record.

For the selected workflow, Company Brain makes the governing knowledge route visible instead of leaving it implicit in a chat, prompt or person's memory.

01Use-case and answer scope↗

02Authoritative source and version↗

03Owner and reviewer decision↗

04Change, impact and release record↗

WHAT MAKES A GOOD FIRST SCOPE

Bring the
real thing.

A useful first scope is deliberately narrow. It is strong enough to show a complete control route and small enough for the accountable people to actually review.

  1. 01One defined AI use case
  2. 02A material policy, procedure or knowledge source
  3. 03A governance or business owner
  4. 04A review threshold for changed answers
Map this to your workflow →
WHAT THE PILOT CAN MEASURE

Governed knowledge routes↗

Changes reviewed within target↗

Released versus held answer states↗

Evidence records available for review↗

INDUSTRY CONTEXT / NOT A CERTIFICATION

For high-risk AI systems, Article 12 of the EU AI Act requires technical capacity for automatic event logging appropriate to the intended purpose. Company Brain can support a separate, governed record of knowledge-source change and human review; it does not itself determine AI Act classification or compliance.

Read EU AI Act Article 12 record-keeping text ↗
CONTROL-LAYER BOUNDARY

No product makes an organisation EU AI Act compliant on its own. Company Brain can support evidence, traceability and governance work inside a wider programme led by the customer and its advisers.