An audit readiness review is worth doing when AI governance exists but evidence and consistency across teams are uncertain or untested.
Organizations often have AI principles, guidelines, or technical practices, but they may not operate as a coherent management system. A readiness review helps determine whether processes are documented, consistently applied, and supported by records that demonstrate implementation.
This is particularly valuable before a formal audit because it identifies gaps in scope definition, role clarity, monitoring, and corrective action workflows. It reduces the risk of surprises by validating whether the organization can demonstrate conformity through objective evidence.
If multiple teams build or operate AI, readiness reviews often uncover inconsistent controls and missing records at the interfaces between teams.
“Readiness is about evidence, consistency, and scope clarity.”
Expert Trainer
Expert Trainer
An auditor should look for objective evidence that AI governance processes are defined, implemented, monitored, and improved across the AI lifecycle.
An AIMS helps an organization govern how AI is planned, implemented, operated, and improved so AI initiatives remain controlled, consistent, and auditable.
Start with definitions and intent, then connect each requirement to a program element such as governance, risk, controls, or operations. Keep scope and evidence in mind as you interpret.
Necessary cookies are always active. You can accept, reject non-essential cookies, or customize your preferences.