Your content rules, read continually, with
the record to show for it.

AI Governance reads your published content against your rules, tells the owner what it finds, and keeps the record. Your organisation sets the approved position and decides what happens when content falls short of it.

It is optional, added after AI Confidence and alongside it, and invested in separately. AI Accelerator builds the basis of confidence. AI Confidence carries it forward across the digital landscape, bringing the estate under control and clearing out what is out of date. Governance comes once that control is understood, because rules applied to an estate nobody has mapped produce findings nobody can act on.

01The content and the rules.

The monitoring scope is the websites and documents brought into view through AI Confidence. Your organisation supplies the approved information and the rules that apply, including requirements already used in publishing, compliance and content review. The people who own the information review the findings and decide what changes are required.

Rules set the position that content has to hold.

Each rule states the position content is checked against, and the basis on which the reviewer decides whether it is corrected, updated or retired.

02Monitoring and alerts.

Content changes, and the reading continues. A page is updated, a PDF is replaced, a campaign site is left online after the campaign ends: each is read against the rules as they stand today, so the check continues long after the initial assessment.

When something is found, the person who owns that content hears about it, with the rule it was checked against and the content itself. They decide whether the information conflicts with the approved position and what to do about it. The decision stays with your people, with the evidence in front of them when they make it. Automation supporting AI Governance sets out how that reading is run.

03Action, and what follows.

Your organisation decides the action and makes the content changes. AAAnow provides findings, evidence, guidance and review. The decision records what was corrected, retained or removed, and why that response addresses the issue.

Later checks establish whether the reported problem has been put right. Where work remains outstanding, the record retains the issue and the action still required. An alert is not a completed response.

04The record leadership reviews.

AI Governance records its monitoring activity in full. The organisation’s decisions and actions complete the governance record, connecting what was found with how it was handled.

For any issue, the record answers the questions a board, a regulator or an insurer would ask: what rule applied, what was found, who reviewed it, what was done, and whether it is closed. FRC guidance asks for ongoing monitoring and reporting on controls. Aon reports growing interest from D&O underwriters in governance evidence. The record is that evidence, held as the work is done. FRC, Corporate Governance Code Guidance, monitoring and controls; Aon, AI Risk 2026.

05Reporting to the board.

Your own reporting arrangements bring the findings that matter to the board, with the action taken, the later checks and any work still outstanding. They stay in that reporting after correction, as FRC guidance recommends. Directors review the evidence to assess the response and whether the controls need to change. FRC, Corporate Governance Code Guidance, paragraphs 262 to 264 and 269.