v0.8 — Working Draft
This page is under active development. Content is directionally accurate but subject to revision. Suggest an edit →
Governance Dashboard¶
The Governance Dashboard is a board-level readout that synthesizes the six Behavioral Governance dimensions into an actionable overview. It is designed for executive committees and boards of directors who need to assess AI governance maturity without wading through operational detail.
Purpose¶
Most governance reporting fails at the executive level for one of two reasons: it is too granular (operational metrics that obscure the strategic picture) or too abstract (green-light dashboards that conceal real problems). The Governance Dashboard occupies the middle ground: structured enough to enable comparison and trend analysis, specific enough to surface issues that require executive attention.
What It Measures¶
The dashboard reports on all six Behavioral Governance dimensions:
| Dimension | What the Dashboard Shows |
|---|---|
| Decision Rights | Whether AI decision authority is clear, current, and enacted — not merely documented. |
| Agent Authority | Whether autonomous AI agents are operating within defined, enforced, and recently reviewed boundaries. |
| Risk Intelligence | Whether risk sensing is active and responsive, with evidence of detection and escalation events. |
| Governance Intelligence | Whether the governance apparatus itself is functioning — the reflexive loop. |
| 1st-Derivative Talent | Whether workforce AI capability is improving at a rate commensurate with technology evolution. |
| Strategic Coherence | Whether AI strategy, business strategy, and governance are aligned in resource allocation and prioritization. |
Traffic-Light Protocol¶
Each dimension receives a status indicator:
- Green: All three assessment layers (Self-Report, Evidence, Behavioral Observation) converge. Governance is enacted as designed.
- Amber: Self-Report and Evidence align, but Behavioral Observation reveals gaps. Governance exists on paper and in artifacts but is inconsistently enacted.
- Red: Significant gaps across layers. Governance is aspirational rather than operational.
The protocol is deliberately conservative. Green requires convergence across all layers, not merely the presence of policies or favorable survey results.
Narrative Layer¶
Traffic lights alone are insufficient. Each dimension includes a narrative summary (two to three sentences) explaining the rating: what is working, what is not, and what has changed since the last assessment period. The narrative is the interpretive layer that transforms data into insight.
Trend Indicators¶
Each dimension shows directional movement: improving, stable, or degrading. Trend data is more informative than point-in-time status for executive decision-making. A dimension rated amber-and-improving requires different attention than one rated amber-and-degrading.
Cadence¶
The dashboard is designed for quarterly reporting, aligned with board meeting cycles. However, the underlying data collection is continuous — the quarterly dashboard is a synthesis of ongoing assessment, not a periodic audit.
Intended Audience¶
The primary audience is the board or executive committee. The dashboard is not an operational management tool; it is a governance oversight tool. Operational teams use the detailed dimensional assessments; executives use the dashboard to determine whether governance requires their intervention.