Initial Focus
Runtime Governance for Regulated AI Workflows
Healthcare and financial services. Consequential workflows.
Clear authority and evidence at the point of action.
Advisory services available now.
Software platform in development.
01 / Financial Services
Make Exceptions as Governable as Automated Decisions
Fraud review. Credit-decision exceptions. Transaction-monitoring case prioritization.
Oversight depends on evidence quality, intervention paths, and who has authority to accept the remaining risk.
For risk, compliance, security and technical leaders examining consequential AI-assisted workflows.
When a Case is Not Ready to Close
01 / Risk Condition
An AI assistant recommends case closure while required evidence is unresolved.
02 / Proportionate Response
The proposed control routes the case for review before progression.
03 / Accountable Decision
A designated reviewer decides within an explicit exception scope.
04 / Retained Evidence
Record the trigger, response, reviewer decision and residual-risk disposition.
Assurance Question: Can the institution reconstruct why the exception was permitted, by whom, and on
what evidence?
02 / Healthcare
Keep Consequential Workflows Reviewable and Accountable
Prior-authorization review. Clinical recommendation routing. Sensitive-data access.
Governance must make escalation responsibilities, evidence requirements, and authorized human review explicit.
For clinical governance, operations, privacy and technical leaders. Governance design does not establish medical efficacy.
When Supporting Information Conflicts
01 / Risk Condition
An AI-assisted prior-authorization review encounters conflicting information.
02 / Proportionate Response
The intended governance design routes the case to qualified human review.
03 / Accountable Decision
The designated reviewer evaluates the gap within the agreed authority boundary.
04 / Retained Evidence
Preserve the evidence gap, escalation path, authority and review outcome.
Assurance Question: Can the organization show how the conflict was handled and who owned the next decision?
03 / A Shared Governance Approach
Evidence. Intervention. Accountable Authority.
Three coordinated engines are being designed to connect what happened, what response is proportionate, and who may decide.
Provenance
Preserve context and reconstructable action histories.
Intervention
Apply proportionate safeguards to consequential AI actions.
Custody
Make human and institutional decision authority explicit.
Constraint Polyphony is a shared conceptual evaluation approach, not a fourth engine.
Explore the proposed platform →04 / A Good Starting Point
One Consequential Workflow. A Useful First Conversation.
Begin with the process and the decisions that matter.
- A bounded AI-assisted workflow
- An executive risk owner
- A technical owner
- A specific control or evidence question
- Permission to examine the process
05 / Available Now
Advisory Grounded in Your Operating Context
Agree the scope, responsibilities and outputs before an engagement begins. Implementation design is distinct from deploying the future Piscys platform.
01
Executive Briefing
Frame a priority workflow, its consequential actions, and the governance questions worth examining.
02
Rapid Risk Assessment
Examine control, evidence and accountability gaps within an agreed scope.
03
Rapid Implementation Sprint
Develop scoped control, escalation and authority designs with agreed responsibilities and outputs.
06 / Before We Begin
Clear Expectations from the Outset
What is available now?
Founder-led executive briefings, scoped assessments and implementation-design engagements. The software platform remains in development.
What does a demonstration show?
Current demonstrations are concept prototypes illustrating intended workflows and controls. They do not represent a commercially deployed platform.
Do we need production data to begin?
No production-data access is assumed. Initial discussions can use process descriptions and appropriately prepared examples. Any later access, handling or retention requirements must be agreed for the engagement.
Can Piscys certify our compliance?
Piscys supports governance and implementation work; it does not certify compliance. Applicable requirements and independent assurance needs depend on the organization and scope.
What happens after the briefing?
If there is a fit, define a focused assessment and any subsequent implementation-design work. Scope, responsibilities and outputs are agreed before the engagement begins.
Identify the Workflow Where Stronger Governance Matters Most
Discuss the decision, its owner, and the evidence needed to support accountable action.
Request an Executive Briefing →Advisory services available now.
Software platform in development.