AI Governance Management System: how to control AI use across your company
AI Governance Management System is a Progresia solution that gives a company a single space for controlled, accountable use of AI: a registry of every system and agent, risk assessment, production readiness checks, and a transparent approval history — instead of scattered AI initiatives with no owner and no oversight.
What problem this solves
A typical situation at a company rolling out AI actively: sales connects one assistant, marketing tests another, developers add their own agent to an internal product, and at some point someone in leadership asks how many AI solutions are actually running across the company and who's responsible for them. Often there's no answer, because tracking — if it happens at all — lives in scattered spreadsheets or in a handful of people's heads.
This isn't just a tidiness problem. Without a single picture, it's impossible to tell which AI solutions handle sensitive data, which depend on external vendors with unclear terms, and which have no assigned owner at all. So-called "shadow AI" — solutions that emerged and run outside the view of security or compliance — isn't a hypothetical scenario; it's a common side effect of rolling out AI tools across several departments at once. AI Governance Management System addresses this through a single registry and end-to-end management processes — from idea to decommissioning.
What's included in the system
A single AI solutions registry
Systems, agents, models, and vendors — each with a clear purpose, owner, and current status.
Lifecycle management
Tracking an AI solution from idea and development through to production and decommissioning, not just cataloging finished systems.
Impact and risk assessment
Recording potential impact on people, the business, and data, and defining measures to reduce identified risks.
Production readiness gate
Checking that the required assessments, approvals, controls, and evidence are in place before a solution moves into production.
Transparent approvals
A decision history with the people responsible, dates, and comments — clear visibility into who approved what and when.
Documents and evidence in context
Policies, reports, and other proof linked to specific systems and controls, with evidence that can be reused.
Managing controls and compliance
Beyond the registry and lifecycle, the system covers a second layer — the actual governance work that separates a tracking spreadsheet from a full governance solution:
- Control management: defining a control's applicability, the person responsible, implementation status, and effectiveness review results
- Statement of Applicability (SoA): generating point-in-time snapshots of control status, either for the organization as a whole or for a specific AI system
- Vendor control: tracking dependencies on external models and services, assessing vendor criticality, and reviewing data-handling terms
- Periodic reviews: recording findings, decisions, and the next review date, so information doesn't go stale between audits
- Access segregation: a role-based model and protection for sensitive fields covering risk and vendor information
Technology foundation
AI Governance Management System is built on Microsoft Power Platform and Dataverse — the same platform Progresia already uses to deliver other products for clients, including Progresia.TM for project management. That means the solution fits naturally into a company's existing Microsoft ecosystem: the same role-based access principles, the same integration options through Power Automate, and the same approach to reporting as in Power BI. The interface is available in Ukrainian and English, which is convenient for companies with international teams or parent structures.
For a company, this also means not adding yet another standalone tool outside its normal working environment. Notifications about an upcoming review date or a pending approval can land in Outlook or Teams, the same way it already works across Progresia's other Power Platform products. An AI solution's owner doesn't need to log into a separate system every day just to avoid missing the moment their action is needed.
How this relates to ISO/IEC 42001
Supports the practices — doesn't grant certification on its own
ISO/IEC 42001 is the standard for AI management systems (AIMS), and it requires structured information, clear accountability, and traceable evidence for every AI solution in an organization. AI Governance Management System provides exactly that structure: a registry, risk assessment, readiness gates, an SoA, and a review history. But conformance with ISO/IEC 42001 is determined by the organization's own processes and evidence — using the solution by itself doesn't mean automatic certification. The system builds the foundation a company uses to establish and maintain its own conformance; it doesn't replace an audit.
In practice, that means linking specific documents to specific records: an impact assessment on people and data is attached to the relevant AI solution in the registry, a model vendor's contract is attached to that vendor's record, and a control's effectiveness review result is attached to the control itself. When an internal or external audit comes around, the company shows a traceable chain of evidence within one system, not scattered files across different folders.
Who this is for
Scale
Companies running several AI solutions at once
- Multiple departments are rolling out AI agents or assistants independently of each other
- There's no single picture of how many solutions are actually running
- One registry is needed instead of scattered per-department spreadsheets
Regulatory pressure
Companies with compliance requirements
- Clients or partners ask how the company controls its use of AI
- Work toward ISO/IEC 42001 conformance is planned or already underway
- Evidence and an approval history are needed, not verbal assurances
AI vendors
IT companies selling their own AI products
- Need to demonstrate to clients that their AI solutions are controlled and transparent
- Need to track dependencies on external models and vendors
- Product lifecycle requires a formal release-readiness gate
Frequently asked questions
Does adopting AI Governance Management System automatically certify a company against ISO/IEC 42001?
No. The system provides the structure, evidence, and processes that support ISO/IEC 42001 practices, but conformance and certification itself are determined by the organization's own processes and evidence — the solution builds the foundation for that, it doesn't replace an audit or a certification assessment.
Do I need a separate Dataverse instance or Power Platform licenses to run the system?
The solution is built on Power Platform and Dataverse, so it uses the same infrastructure as Progresia's other products on this platform. The exact licenses needed depend on the scale of deployment and the number of users — that's clarified during the consultation stage.
Who typically owns this kind of AI solutions registry within a company?
Most often information security, a compliance function, or an IT director, depending on the company's structure. The system supports a role-based access model, so different owners can see and edit only the part of the information within their area of responsibility.
Can we start with just the basic registry and expand later?
Yes. A company can start with the AI solutions registry and ownership, then add risk assessment, readiness gates, the SoA, and vendor management in stages, depending on how mature the company's AI governance practice already is at the outset.
Want to see what AI Governance Management System would look like for your company?
We'll walk through a demo using the real AI solutions your team already runs, and together figure out where to start — the registry, risk assessment, or the full management cycle.