Request an Independent Review

When Boards Typically Seek an Independent View

• An AI project has consumed material time or capital without decisive outcomes
• Additional funding is being requested for an ongoing initiative
• Two or more AI proposals compete for approval
• Performance metrics appear strong, but conviction remains low

The Question an Independent Review Addresses

Not: Is the system impressive? Is the team competent?

But: Does this investment still deserve capital?

Conditions for a Meaningful Review

To protect decision integrity—for both the organization and the assessor—reviews are undertaken when:

• The initiative involves material capital exposure
• A Board member or C-level executive sponsors the review
• The objective is decision clarity, not post-hoc validation
• Relevant documentation and stakeholders are accessible
• Evidence can be evaluated with professional rigor

Preserving Independence

An engagement may be declined when independence or evidentiary integrity cannot be maintained—including situations where:

• The scope falls outside demonstrated competence
• Prior relationships could impair objectivity
• Governance or access constraints prevent meaningful evaluation
• The request seeks confirmation of a pre-decided outcome

Next Step

If you are facing an AI investment decision where capital exposure is real, evidence is ambiguous, and momentum is strong—an independent review can restore decision clarity.