Function: Executive decision support

AI Workflow for Automation Governance Review

Deployment Brief

Use this workflow before automations move from helpful experiments into operating processes that affect customers, records, money, or decisions.

Difficulty

High

Revenue impact

Medium

Operational impact

High

Risk level

High

When it runs

An automation, AI workflow, agent, integration, or scheduled process is proposed, changed, or reviewed.

Evidence in

automation purposedata accessallowed actionssystem permissionsrisk tierhuman approval gatesaudit log requirementsowner and pause plan

What AI prepares

automation governance review packet
access and action inventory
approval gate map
audit log checklist
risk tier note
deployment review task

Decision rules

Define what the automation can access.
Define what it can change or send.
Map approval gates to risk level.
Log inputs, outputs, tool actions, and human approvals.
Name an owner and pause plan before deployment.

Human approval point

Automation owner, business owner, and risk or technical reviewer approve access, actions, review gates, audit logs, monitoring, and pause controls.

What stays human

Do not automate governance approval, risk acceptance, access expansion, irreversible actions, or production deployment without owner review.

Quality and stop gates

Source evidence is attached
Qualified owner review is required
Assumptions are visible
Stop rules are visible
Measurement event is logged

How it is measured

Track automations inventoried, controls approved, logging completeness, approval failures, incidents, access changes, and review cadence.

Systems involved

Planning or meeting recordsSource evidenceRisk or governance checklistExecutive review workflow

Workflow Dataset Record

Deployment evidence and duplicate boundary

This section is generated from the enriched workflow dataset. It is designed for pilot planning, not as validated outcome evidence.

Buyer Problem

Automation Governance Review is weak when executive decision support teams rely on scattered notes, incomplete fields, and informal judgment instead of a source-backed operating record. The problem is not a missing AI draft; it is the missing owner, evidence, exception status, and review path that decide whether the work can safely move forward.

Economic Logic

The value of Automation Governance Review comes from reducing avoidable rework, misrouting, stalled decisions, and unsupported customer or revenue actions. The pilot should prove that required evidence is captured earlier, exceptions are reviewed by Strategy operations lead, and the team can measure readiness without claiming validated outcome lift.

Baseline Metric

automation_governance_review_review_ready_rate

Share of automation governance review records with source evidence, required business fields, named owner, human review status, exception outcome, and measurable follow-up result before the workflow is expanded.

Source system: CRM record store, workflow owner notes, pilot evidence log, exception review queue, risk review notes, project management or knowledge base

Minimum Viable Pilot

Duration: 30 to 60 days
Sample: First 100 automation governance review records, or all records from one executive decision support segment over 45 days
Owner: Strategy operations lead
Threshold: At least 90% of sampled automation governance review records include source evidence, owner decision, and exception status; 100% of high-impact or customer-visible exceptions receive human review before action.

Unique Workflow Test

Audit 100 automation governance review records for source link, required fields, timestamp, owner, exception status, review decision, downstream action, and result. The test passes only when the workflow can separate approved action from blocked, low-confidence, or not-ready records.

Duplicate Guard

Keep automation governance review separate from adjacent executive decision support workflows by requiring automation_governance_review_review_ready_rate, the Strategy operations lead review point, and the source boundary nist-ai-rmf, microsoft-responsible-ai-tools, atlassian-change-record. Adjacent pages may share data, but this record owns the sampled decision path and exception outcome.

Not Ready If

Automation Governance Review does not have stable source records, owner fields, or status fields to sample.
No accountable executive decision support owner can approve exceptions or customer-visible actions.
The team cannot track timestamp, source, owner, exception, and outcome fields across the pilot sample.

Claim level: Pilot-shaped. Sources support workflow mechanics and pilot design unless field evidence is attached.

NIST AI Risk Management Framework

AI workflows should include risk mapping, measurement, governance, and accountable human oversight.

Microsoft Responsible AI Tools and Practices

AI risk work should map, measure, and manage risks with impact assessment, human review, safety, oversight, and governance tools.

Atlassian Success Central: Process a Change Record

Change requests can be categorized as standard, normal, or emergency and routed through authorization based on risk and guardrails.

Keep moving

Where this workflow connects next

A useful AI build rarely lives on one page. Check the surrounding workflow, the decision rule, and the deployment path before you commit budget.

Workflow group

Control And Review

Compare the nearby workflows that usually break before or after this one.

Open

Decision tool

Automate vs. keep manual

Check which parts should stay human before this workflow touches customers or records.

Open

Industry fit

Browse industries

See how this workflow changes by revenue model, buyer urgency, delivery risk, and customer handoff.

Open

Service path

Customer Service AI

Use AI where response speed and answer quality change the customer experience.

Open

Revenue review

Request a workflow review

Bring this workflow and the business number it should move.

Open

Adjacent workflows

AI Use Case Prioritization Risk Review Preparation Vendor Evaluation Executive Decision Briefs

TL;DR

Automation governance should answer six questions: owner, access, allowed actions, approval gate, audit trail, and pause plan.

What is automation governance review?

Automation governance review is the process of checking an automation’s purpose, data access, allowed actions, permissions, risk tier, human approval gates, logs, monitoring, and pause controls.

Who is this workflow for?

Companies deploying AI workflows, agents, internal automations, or customer-facing process automation.
Owners who need speed without losing control.
Teams that want governance at the workflow level, not just in a policy document.

What breaks in the manual process?

The manual process fails when governance happens after deployment. The automation already has access, actions, and users before anyone can explain who approved what.

How does the AI-enabled process work?

The workflow inventories purpose, access, actions, permissions, risk tier, approval gates, logs, owner, and pause plan. It prepares a governance packet for review.

What does this look like in practice?

Example scenario: A support workflow can summarize tickets and draft replies. The governance review confirms it cannot send replies without approval, logs source tickets and drafts, mirrors user permissions, and has an owner who can pause it.

What decision rules should govern this workflow?

Define what the automation can access.
Define what it can change or send.
Map approval gates to risk level.
Log inputs, outputs, tool actions, and human approvals.
Name an owner and pause plan before deployment.

What are the implementation steps?

Trigger: An automation is proposed, changed, or reviewed.
Inputs collected: The workflow collects purpose, data access, actions, permissions, risk tier, approval gates, logging requirements, owner, and pause plan.
AI/system action: AI prepares a governance packet, access inventory, approval map, logging checklist, and risk note.
Human review point: Automation, business, and risk/technical owners review controls and deployment status.
Output delivered: Approved governance record is attached to the automation or deployment plan.
Measurement logged: Review date, incidents, access changes, approval failures, and pause events are logged.

Required inputs

automation purpose
data access
allowed actions
system permissions
risk tier
human approval gates
audit log requirements
owner and pause plan

Expected outputs

automation governance review packet
access and action inventory
approval gate map
audit log checklist
risk tier note
deployment review task

Human review point

Automation owner, business owner, and risk or technical reviewer approve access, actions, review gates, audit logs, monitoring, and pause controls.

Risks and stop rules

automation can access too much data
actions happen without approval
logs are incomplete
no one owns the workflow after launch

Stop the workflow when assumptions are not sourced, ownership is unclear, risk or capital decisions are involved, automation controls are incomplete, or final commitments would be made without qualified owner approval.

Best first version

Inventory five automations with owner, data access, allowed actions, approval gates, logs, and pause plan.

Advanced version

Add risk-tiering, control testing, audit sampling, incident review, permission mirroring, and governance refresh cadence.

Related workflows

Measurement plan

Track automations inventoried, controls approved, logging completeness, approval failures, incidents, access changes, and review cadence.

What not to automate

Do not automate governance approval, risk acceptance, access expansion, irreversible actions, or production deployment without owner review.

FAQ

What is automation governance review?

It is the review of an automation’s owner, access, allowed actions, approval gates, audit logs, risk tier, and pause controls.

What can AI prepare?

AI can prepare the governance packet, access inventory, approval map, audit checklist, and risk notes.

What should stay under human review?

Access, actions, approval gates, risk tier, deployment status, and pause controls should stay under business and technical owner review.

What is the simplest first version?

Inventory five automations with owner, data access, allowed actions, approval gates, logs, and pause plan.

How should this workflow be measured?

Measure controls approved, logging completeness, approval failures, incidents, access changes, and review cadence.

Related Workflow Group

AI Workflows for Control And Review

Compare this workflow against nearby operating problems before choosing the first build. The group shows what usually breaks together, what evidence is needed, and where review still matters.

View Workflow Group

Related Workflows

Risk Review Preparation AI Use Case Prioritization Vendor Evaluation

AI reporting workflow operating briefs

A field report on turning scattered updates into reviewable operating briefs with source evidence and decisions.

Read Report