Generative AI Governance: Copilots vs AI Agents
Generative AI
A tool that drafts text and an agent that changes business records need different controls. Describe what the system can do before choosing the approval path.
By MAST Consulting Group · Updated · Implementation guidance
A practical approach
Record whether the system only proposes an output or can execute an action.
Restrict access to the knowledge and tools needed for the approved task.
Define which outputs or actions require human approval.
Monitor errors and changes in model behaviour, tool access and source information.
- 01Question
- 02Evidence
- 03Decision
- 04Review
Put the idea to work
Bring the business owner, technical lead and relevant risk specialists into the same discussion. Start with one real use case and document the information available today. Record missing evidence as an action with an owner, rather than allowing uncertainty to disappear in a summary score.
A useful review output distinguishes facts, assumptions and decisions. It also states what would trigger a reassessment: a new purpose, a changed model, a different data source or an incident. This makes the review useful after the initial meeting.
Make your next AI decision count.
Discuss your ambitions, constraints and next practical steps with MAST.
Apply this to your AI programme
Use this guide with the people who own the business outcome, technical delivery and risk decisions. Define the system boundary, record the evidence available and assign actions for the gaps before approving the next stage.
Plan around your operating location
For regional or cross-border programmes, identify the entities, data flows and accountable owners before deciding which governance requirements apply.