Mandate

Boards engage me when AI governance can no longer be delegated or postponed.

Boards engage Patrick Upmann when AI governance can no longer be postponed, delegated, or absorbed by existing structures.
Each mandate is:

  • time-boxed
  • pressure-driven
  • focused on restoring defensible decision authority

Mandates are initiated when governance must hold under audit, regulatory scrutiny, incidents, or liability exposure — not in theory, but in accountable decision-making.

Board AI Governance
Stress Test

Early exposure

Purpose
Determine whether your current AI governance would survive an audit, regulatory inquiry, incident, or court review today.

What this addresses

  • Unclear decision authority
  • Diffused accountability
  • Missing or non-admissible evidence
  • Governance that exists only on paper

Outcome

  • Board-ready assessment
  • Clear exposure map
  • Minimum changes required to reach admissibility
Typical duration: 
2–4 weeks

Pre-Incident Accountability & Evidence Review

Rising pressure

Purpose
Build decision authority and evidence before Legal, Audit, or regulators ask.

What this addresses

  • Decisions that cannot currently be defended
  • Evidence that would need reconstruction
  • Escalation paths that collapse under pressure

Outcome

  • Decision boundaries
  • Approval & escalation design
  • Evidence and documentation standards that hold under scrutiny
Typical duration: 
2–6 weeks

Interim AI Governance Decision Lead

Active escalation

Purpose
When governance decisions cannot wait, I step in as a time-boxed interim authority. Authority is explicit, documented, and designed to transition back to the organisation.

What this addresses

  • Blocked or politically diffused decisions
  • Active audit or regulatory pressure
  • Leadership gaps in accountability

Outcome

  • Stabilised governance authority
  • Board-facing defensibility
  • Transition back to internal ownership
Typical duration: 
4–12 weeks

Board AI Governance Advisory Mandate

Early exposure

Purpose
Provide board-level advisory where AI governance decisions must be shaped before escalation, but already require explicit decision ownership, defensibility, foresight, and accountability alignment.

When initiated

  • emerging regulatory exposure
  • strategic uncertainty around AI risk, trust, or market access
  • preparation before audits, supervisory review, or public scrutiny

What this addresses

  • fragmented future logic across legal, technical, and business domains
    (conflicting assumptions, timelines, and risk thresholds)
  • regulatory ambiguity at board decision level
  • trust, legitimacy, and license-to-operate questions

Advisory scope

  • decision-relevant strategy (not policy drafting)
  • regulatory foresight and governance architecture
  • trust as competitive and institutional advantage

Mandate characteristics

  • board-anchored
  • time-boxed
  • decision-oriented
  • explicitly non-operational
Typical duration: 
2–4 weeks

Request a Board Mandate

If AI governance decisions are becoming personally exposed, time-critical, or legally sensitive, a mandate can be initiated directly at board or executive level.
Patrick operates independently and is engaged where governance must withstand scrutiny without reconstruction. A governing principle applies to every mandate:

If governance needs to be reconstructed after the fact, it never existed.