Diagnose
Independent assessment across data, talent, governance, tooling and regulatory posture—using evidence, interviews, and artifact review, not just self-rating.
/ Stratégie et innovation /
Évaluation indépendante de la donnée, du talent, de la gouvernance et du tooling—avec un plan de remédiation exécutable au trimestre suivant.
The problem
Leadership repeats a maturity score from a vendor questionnaire. The first internal audit or due diligence question dismantles it in minutes.
Policies exist on paper, but model lineage, approval logs and incident playbooks are missing the moment regulators or external audit ask.
Nobody can answer who actually owns AI in the business, where the critical skills sit, and which roles are single points of failure.
EU AI Act, sector regulators and procurement requirements are tracked informally—exposure surfaces only when a contract or audit forces the question.
Fonctionnement
Independent assessment across data, talent, governance, tooling and regulatory posture—using evidence, interviews, and artifact review, not just self-rating.
Maturity scored by dimension with risks weighted by likelihood and impact—so leadership sees not just gaps, but the order in which they actually hurt.
Sequenced 90-day remediation roadmap with named owners, dependencies and exit criteria—so the audit ends in a plan, not a binder.
Assessment depth adapts to sector, regulatory posture, and current AI footprint.
Ce qui est inclus
Independent, evidence-based audit across the dimensions that matter—delivered with a remediation roadmap that fits your next quarter, not a wishlist.
Coverage, quality, lineage, access and platform maturity scored against the use cases the strategy depends on.
Policies, decision rights, model lifecycle, incident handling and audit trail evaluated against EU AI Act and your sector regulator.
Critical roles, single points of failure, sourcing posture and reskilling needs mapped to the next 12 months of demand.
Independent view of platform, MLOps, evaluation and observability tooling—what to keep, what to replace, what to integrate.
Top AI risks (regulatory, operational, reputational, financial) with likelihood, impact, owner and mitigation status.
Sequenced 90-day plan with owners and exit criteria, plus a 12-month view of dependencies and investments.
Propulsé par Synapse
Résultats
Results vary by context, data maturity, and scope. We scope honestly before we promise precisely.
1
honest maturity baseline shared across business, data, IT and risk
Orientative—replaces conflicting internal narratives.
≤90 days
remediation plan with owners and exit criteria ready to execute
Orientative—based on typical engagements.
Full
EU AI Act posture mapped against current artifacts and processes
Notre façon de travailler
Week 1
Agree assessment scope, target maturity, regulatory perimeter and the decisions the audit must support.
Week 2–3
Interviews, artifact review, control walkthroughs and data sampling across the agreed scope.
Week 4–5
Maturity scoring by dimension, risk register, and validation workshops with business, data, IT and risk owners.
Week 6+
Hand over scored baseline, prioritized risks, and the 90-day remediation roadmap with named owners.
Timelines vary by organization size, regulatory exposure, and the number of in-flight AI initiatives.
Commencer
No commitment. We start with a scoped session to agree the assessment perimeter and the decisions the audit must support.