AI governance and assurance for autonomous systems.
Your AI agents are ready to act. Your governance isn’t.
Most AI pilots don’t stall on technology. They stall because nobody can evidence the controls around them.
Aivance identifies the missing control, tests whether it works at runtime, and gives your team a practical path to close the gap.
30-minute review · Written diagnosis within 48 hours · No obligation to proceed
Explore our point of view on Agentic AI Governance →Enforcement Gap Review
A clear answer in 30 minutes.
We identify whether your controls satisfy the frameworks that apply, work reliably at runtime, and can be evidenced afterwards.
Within 48 hours, you receive a written diagnosis mapped to your applicable frameworks.
Book Your Enforcement Gap Review
Is this your situation?
The situations that bring clients to Aivance.
Aivance works with organisations where AI carries material regulatory, contractual, or operational consequences.
Aivance is usually brought in by CROs, CISOs, enterprise architects, AI programme leads, compliance leaders, and technology executives who need a control decision they can defend.
The work is relevant where requirements arise from the IMDA Model AI Governance Framework, MAS AI risk expectations, ISO/IEC 42001, PDPA, contractual commitments, or board-level risk appetite.
Your AI pilot is blocked from production
Risk, compliance, security, or executive approval is holding back a system that already works technically.
Your governance controls cannot be evidenced
You have policies, registers, and dashboards, but cannot show that the right controls hold when the system acts.
Your autonomous system needs bounded authority
You need to define what an agent may do, when a human must intervene, and how the decision will be reconstructed later.
Where Aivance fits
The layer between AI governance and runtime enforcement.
Frameworks define expectations. Security and identity platforms provide technical capabilities. Engineering teams build the systems. Aivance connects those layers by defining what an autonomous system is authorised to do, under which conditions, and what evidence must exist when it acts.
Frameworks
Define expectations through regulation, standards, and risk appetite.
Security and identity
Authenticate systems, protect data, and provide technical capabilities.
Engineering
Build, integrate, and operate the production system.
Aivance
Translate governance intent into control requirements and evidence.
The governance stack
Governance is not complete until it can shape what the system does.
Most AI governance programmes are strong on policy and process. The gap appears at the execution boundary: can the system constrain, pause, or evidence a consequential action?
Policy layer
What the organisation says should happen: principles, obligations, risk appetite, and accountability.
Process layer
How people are expected to respond: approvals, reviews, escalation, monitoring, and reporting.
Enforcement layer
What the system can technically do: allow, deny, or escalate an action based on verified conditions at runtime.
Runtime decisions
Allow
Execute within granted authority.
Deny
Prevent execution under current conditions.
Escalate
Hold for human approval.
Flagship engagements
Choose the stage that matches your situation.
Start with the complimentary Enforcement Gap Review. It tells you where a material gap may exist. If it does, the full assessment maps your AI systems, applicable frameworks, and control evidence in depth. From there, we design the control or prepare the implementation in a focused engagement.
AI Governance Gap Assessment
Map every AI system in scope, the frameworks that apply, and the controls that are evidenced, enforced, or missing.
Main output
System inventory, framework mapping, gap analysis, and prioritised roadmap
AI Governance Framework Design
Design the policy, authority, process, and control blueprint for your AI programme.
Main output
Framework, authority, and implementation playbook
Pilot-to-Production Governance Sprint
Move a stalled AI pilot toward production.
Main output
Governance scaffolding for implementation
What you receive
Clear outputs your team can use.
The work is designed to help your team make a decision, close a gap, or demonstrate control without producing another strategy deck.
Written enforcement-gap diagnosis
A clear view of which controls are documented, technically enforced, or missing.
Implementation-ready control architecture
Authority boundaries, intervention conditions, runtime requirements, and evidence design.
Prioritised remediation roadmap
A defensible sequence for your internal teams and implementation partners to execute.
Board-ready executive summary
A concise explanation of your AI risk posture, material gaps, and recommended next actions.
Why Aivance
Practical governance for the people who have to implement it.
Aivance combines enterprise infrastructure experience with AI governance and assurance. Arjen brings more than 30 years of experience building and operating large-scale systems, including nine years as Director of Advanced Consulting Services for Asia-Pacific and Japan at Akamai Technologies. The work is led directly by Arjen, with specialist legal, security, technology, or implementation capacity brought in when the engagement requires it.
Find out where your AI governance policy stops and runtime enforcement begins.
Start with the complimentary 30-Minute Enforcement Gap Review. We identify which controls are documented, which are technically enforced, and what evidence is missing. Within 48 hours, you receive a written diagnosis mapped to your applicable frameworks.
Book Your Enforcement Gap Review