AI Readiness Diagnostic

A structured, evidence-based assessment of how ready your operating model and management system are to govern AI. Each area is scored against a weighted set of criteria drawn from good practice and the relevant standards, giving you a measure of maturity rather than an opinion. During scoping you tell us what matters most to your operation, and we weight the assessment accordingly, so the result reflects your priorities rather than a generic template.

No - and most clients haven't certified. That is often why they are here: the diagnostic tells you where you stand before you decide whether certification is worth pursuing at all.We are not a certification body and we do not issue certificates. That is part of our independence, by design. Our assessors are qualified lead auditors, so the work is conducted to audit-grade rigour against the standard's requirements, overseen by an AIGP-certified practitioner. You get the depth of a formal audit without committing to a certification path, and whether or not you ever certify, the findings stand on their own.

Those standards govern quality, safety, environment and information security for decisions made by people in defined roles. AI changes who - or what - makes the decision, and where accountability sits.

Your existing system usually has the right bones. But its decision rights, competence requirements, management of change and assurance were written before automated decisions entered the loop. And the commercial and financial decisions AI is now touching - estimating, forecasting, schedule risk, claims - sit outside the scope those frameworks were written to cover.

The diagnostic tests whether they still hold and where they need extending, inside the system you already run, not alongside it.

Two things. If you place products or operate in the EU, the high-risk obligations still apply , deferred to 2 December 2027 for stand-alone systems and 2 August 2028 for AI built into regulated products. Those dates are now fixed and the direction is settled.

But not everything moved. The transparency obligations were not deferred and apply from 2 August 2026, and the AI literacy duty has applied since February 2025. And even outside the EU, the Act is already shaping client questionnaires, insurance and Board expectations globally.

The deferral is time to build governance properly, not a reprieve.

A Board-ready briefing: an integrated maturity view of each dimension in scope, a clear read on where your operating model and management system are sound and where they are not, and a prioritised intervention sequence. Delivered and walked through. Where wanted, a fixed-scope proposal for the next step.

A Big Four programme is broader, longer and deliberately built to expand. A vendor's assessment isn't independent, its outcome supports a sale.The PDAS assessment is deliberately confined to an agreed scope and fee, and structurally independent. We build no AI models, select no platforms, integrate no AI systems and take no vendor commissions. Nothing in our revenue depends on the answer we give you. And it is led by practitioners who have run these operations.

Under NDA, with a defined document request agreed at scoping. Evidence is handled confidentially, access is limited to the assessment team, and materials are returned or destroyed on request at the close of the engagement. Your material is not used to train AI models, and is not shared with vendors, platforms or third parties.

A fixed fee, agreed in writing before any work begins. No day-rate creep, no land-and-expand. It is priced as a defined diagnostic and scales with scope - a single dimension costs less than the full four - and by design it sits well below a Big Four programme. We confirm the figure after the scoping call, once boundaries and sample size are set.