Everyday AI — Can You Prove Your AI Is Governed? | Galtea
The EU AI Act requires proof of oversight, not good intentions.•If you can't show your AI's decision trail, you're already non-compliant.•The EU AI Act requires proof of oversight, not good intentions.•If you can't show your AI's decision trail, you're already non-compliant.•The EU AI Act requires proof of oversight, not good intentions.•If you can't show your AI's decision trail, you're already non-compliant.•The EU AI Act requires proof of oversight, not good intentions.•If you can't show your AI's decision trail, you're already non-compliant.•The EU AI Act requires proof of oversight, not good intentions.•If you can't show your AI's decision trail, you're already non-compliant.•The EU AI Act requires proof of oversight, not good intentions.•If you can't show your AI's decision trail, you're already non-compliant.•
Your employees are letting ChatGPT make decisions nobody's keeping a record of.
Your AI is making decisions you can't fully audit, and an incident could be just around the corner.
Most employees use AI tools ungoverned. It works until an audit asks for the paper trail. This is what a random Thursday could look like for your compliance team:
09:14 AM
A team deploys a new AI feature without a documented risk assessment.
Missing required risk classification
10:22 AM
An AI-assisted hiring decision is made with no human sign-off logged.
No human oversight on record
11:05 AM
A vendor updates the model your product runs on, and nobody re-tests it.
Undocumented change to a high-risk system
11:45 AM
A customer asks how an AI decision about them was made, and no one can answer.
No audit trail to produce
12:05 PM
An incident happens, and there's no record of who was notified or when.
Missing incident report
All of this before lunch.
Now multiply it for every AI system, in every department, all year long
That's tens of thousands of untracked decisions, and one of them is the one an auditor asks about.