Sample Report — Demonstration Data

Review Assessment

Prepared using Triance, Draita’s AI Governance Navigator.

Sample Report — Demonstration Data

All figures below are illustrative sample data for a fictional organization.

Executive summary

Ready for a controlled pilot, not for organization-wide deployment

Northbridge Group has clear executive intent and a mature security baseline, which places it ahead of most organizations of similar size. Readiness is constrained by governance foundations rather than technology: there is no maintained inventory of AI tools, permissions across document repositories have not been reviewed for assistant-scale access, and generative AI is not yet covered by an approved policy.

These are addressable within one quarter. We recommend proceeding with a scoped pilot in parallel with remediation, then reassessing before broad rollout. Four material questions were answered Unknown, and each should be resolved before licences are extended beyond the pilot group.

Overall readiness

62%

Pilot Ready

Classification bands: Not Ready (0-39), Foundation (40-54), Pilot Ready (55-74), Deployment Ready (75-100).

Where you are strong

Strongest areas

  • Security

    78%

    Identity controls, MFA enforcement and endpoint baselines are mature and consistently applied.

  • Strategy and ownership

    74%

    Leadership intent is clear and AI objectives are recognised at board level.

  • People and adoption

    68%

    Staff appetite is high and early champions have emerged in operations and marketing.

Where you are exposed

Highest-priority gaps

  • AI inventory

    41%High risk

    No maintained register and no measurement of unsanctioned tool usage.

  • Data and access

    48%High risk

    Permission hygiene and data classification are not ready for assistant-scale access.

  • Operations and evidence

    55%Attention

    Controls are informal and cannot currently be evidenced to auditors or customers.

  • Risk and compliance

    57%Attention

    Policy coverage and vendor assurance are incomplete for regulated data.

Recommendation

Deployment recommendation

Proceed with a controlled pilot of up to 40 Microsoft 365 Copilot licences, limited to departments whose repositories have completed a permissions review. Defer ChatGPT Enterprise procurement until vendor data residency and sub-processor terms are assessed. Do not extend licences organization-wide until the AI inventory, policy and retention controls are in place and evidenced.

Recommended scope
Pilot — 40 licences, 3 departments
Reassessment point
Day 90, before wider rollout
Blocking conditions
Inventory, permissions, policy

Priorities

Top five actions

  1. 1Assign a named executive owner for AI adoption and governance.
  2. 2Complete a permissions and oversharing review on all repositories in scope for assistants.
  3. 3Approve and communicate the AI acceptable-use policy with an acknowledgement record.
  4. 4Establish the AI tool register and run a first discovery sweep for unsanctioned tools.
  5. 5Define retention rules for prompts, outputs and chat histories.

Basis of assessment

Assessment methodology and disclaimer

The assessment covers seven governance areas — strategy and ownership, AI inventory, data and access, risk and compliance, security, people and adoption, and operations and evidence. Each area contains structured questions answered as Yes, Partially, No, Unknown or Not applicable. Responses are scored, weighted by the organization profile (size, industry and regulatory exposure), and normalised to a percentage per area. The overall readiness score is the weighted mean of the seven area scores, and the classification band is derived from that score.

Unknown responses are treated as unresolved risk rather than neutral, because unverified controls cannot be evidenced to an auditor, insurer or enterprise customer. Not applicable responses are excluded from the denominator of their area.

Disclaimer: this report is based on self-reported responses and has not been independently verified through technical testing or document review. It is provided for management planning purposes and does not constitute legal, regulatory or audit advice. Figures shown in this prototype are illustrative sample data.