Figuring out what’s broken.
Most organisations don’t lack good intentions. They lack an honest view of the gap between what they say they stand for and how their systems actually behave.
Assessment work starts there. It’s independent, rigorous, and specific — designed to tell you what you actually need to know, not what’s comfortable to hear. The output is always a clear picture of where you are, what the risks are, and what closing the gap would require.
Who this is for
Organisations that have made public commitments on AI ethics, ESG, or responsible governance and want to know how their operations measure up
Leadership teams preparing for regulatory scrutiny, investor due diligence, or public accountability processes
Organisations that have experienced an incident — reputational, regulatory, or operational — and need an independent view of what went wrong structurally
Boards seeking independent assurance that executive claims about responsible AI or ESG are substantiated
Services
An independent view of where you actually are
A structured review of your AI governance practices, documentation, and decision-making processes against leading frameworks and emerging regulatory standards. Produces a clear findings report with a risk-rated gap analysis and prioritised recommendations. Suitable for organisations preparing for the EU AI Act, Australian AI governance expectations, or investor due diligence.
Stated commitments vs actual design
A targeted assessment focused on a specific commitment, policy, or claim — mapping what the organisation says against what its systems actually produce. Fast, focused, and actionable. Commonly used before publishing an annual report, ahead of a regulatory submission, or when a commitment made publicly needs to be substantiated internally.
Finding the structural causes behind operational symptoms
An examination of people systems, processes, or operational design to identify where the architecture produces outcomes inconsistent with stated values. Draws on quantitative data, qualitative listening, and structural analysis. Particularly useful when an organisation is
Know your exposure before the regulator does
A forward-looking review of where an organisation's AI or ESG practices may fall short of incoming regulatory requirements — including Australian mandatory climate disclosure, AI governance expectations, and relevant international frameworks. Produces a readiness scorecard and a prioritised remediation roadmap.
What to Expect
Assessment engagements are independent. The value of this work depends on the ability to look at what's actually there — not what's been prepared for review. Aubrey works directly with leadership and cross-functional teams, reviews documentation and data, and produces findings that reflect the real picture.
Findings are delivered as a working document with clear prioritisation — not a theoretical framework, but a practical guide to what needs to change and in what order.