Industry · Banking
Controls and procedures that a supervisor can trace, from the rule to the person who did the work.
Operational procedures, control evidence and policy change move at different speeds across branches and back offices.
Example: Ashford Mutual Bank (fictional). Fictional organisation, fictional data, scripted answers.
What makes this sector hard
- 01Branch and back-office procedures change at different speeds, so a branch can be following last quarter's version.
- 02A change in the rules that apply has to be traced by hand to the procedures, contracts and controls it touches.
- 03Bank statements and ledger entries disagree for days, and the differences are explained in email.
- 04One failed control can stop several others, and the chain becomes clear only after an incident.
See it work on Ashford Mutual Bank’s own data
Simulation. Five short examples, one for each working area. The wording is scripted and no model is called; the figures are computed from what you decide, and a person’s approval covers exactly what you decided.
Choose what the branch assistant may answer from
- What happened
- Branches want an assistant that answers staff questions from the bank's procedures, and the head of operations must decide which sources it may read.
- The question
- Which sources may the branch assistant read, and which must stay out of its reach? Asked by: Head of branch operations.
Choose what the branch assistant may answer fromChoose the sources the assistant may read. Restricted material cannot be chosen; a classification the analysis is unsure of must be confirmed by a person first.Open
Choose the sources the assistant may read. Restricted material cannot be chosen; a classification the analysis is unsure of must be confirmed by a person first.
Choose what the platform may read. Restricted material cannot be put in scope here, and a classification the analysis is unsure of must be verified by a person.
Read it? Source Holds Sensitivity What the analysis thinks it is Branch cash-handling procedures
Procedures library74 documents internal Approved procedures clear Product factsheets
Public website120 documents open Customer-facing leaflets clear Fraud investigation case notes
Case management system3,100 documents restricted Case files clear Staff training modules
Learning system210 documents internal Training content check Customer correspondence archive
Mail archive48,200 documents restricted Letters and emails clear Internal policy bulletins
Intranet390 documents internal Policy notices check - Sources in scope
- 0 of 6
- documents in scope
- 0
- Restricted, kept out
- 2 sources
- To verify
- 0
0 of 6 sources are open to the assistant, 0 documents; 2 restricted source(s) stay out.
The assistant answers from approved procedures, product information and training content, and never from case notes or customer correspondence [S1]. 0 included source(s) still need a person to confirm what they are before the scope is ready.
Relies on: S1 · Procedure and records inventory (fictional)
The head of branch operations with information security decides. Approving sets what the assistant may read for the pilot branches. It does not switch the assistant on, and it can be narrowed or revoked at any time.
Not ready. Choose at least one source to read first.
Not done here. It does not read restricted material or customer records, and it does not answer from a source a person has not classified.
See which controls stop when one control fails
- What happened
- The daily payment screening control failed for three hours last week, and the head of compliance wants to know what else it protects.
- The question
- If a control fails, which other controls and processes stop with it, and which are only weakened? Asked by: Head of compliance.
See which controls stop when one control failsChoose a control that fails. What depends on it is worked out from the control map: a hard link stops the next thing, a soft one only weakens it.Open
Choose a control that fails. What depends on it is worked out from the control map: a hard link stops the next thing, a soft one only weakens it.
Fail one or more items and see what stops and what only degrades, worked out by following the dependencies.
Choose what fails. Hard dependencies stop with it; soft ones carry on, degraded.
- Run when an account is opened.
- Refreshed from the list provider each night.
- Depends on the identity check.Depends on: Customer identity check (hard)
- Compares every payment with the updated list.Depends on: Screening list update (hard)
- Held until screening has run.Depends on: Daily payment screening (hard)
- Reviewed each morning.Depends on: Daily payment screening (soft), Account opening (soft)
- Signed by the head of compliance.Depends on: Outgoing international payments (soft), Suspicious-activity review queue (hard)
- fails
- 0
- Stops as a result
- 0
- Degraded
- 0
- Unaffected
- 7
0 control failed; 0 other(s) stop and 0 are weakened. The most critical: Screening list update.
Stopped: none. Weakened: none [S1].
The three-hour failure last week is the evidence for the screening link: payments were held, and the review queue worked from earlier alerts [S2].
Relies on: S1 · Control map (fictional)S2 · Incident record: payment screening failure (fictional)
The head of compliance decides. Approving records the dependency picture in the control map. It does not change any control or report anything outside the bank.
Not ready. Fail at least one item first, to see what depends on it.
Not done here. It does not judge whether a control is adequate or report an incident anywhere: compliance officers decide both.
Explain the differences between the bank statement and the ledger
- What happened
- The month-end reconciliation of the main current account shows differences the team cannot explain from memory.
- The question
- Which unmatched items are real exceptions, and how much is in question? Asked by: Treasury accountant.
Explain the differences between the bank statement and the ledgerEach unmatched line has a reason. Mark it as needing action, or as a timing difference that will clear; the amount in question is recomputed from your decisions.Open
Each unmatched line has a reason. Mark it as needing action, or as a timing difference that will clear; the amount in question is recomputed from your decisions.
Review each flagged record: confirm it or dismiss it. The totals and the answer below follow your decisions.
Date Statement Ledger Amount in question Finding Decision 3 Jun Payment to Corvane Ltd 12,400 12,400 12,400 Matched None needed 5 Jun Receipt from Hale Rail 9,800 9,800 9,800 Matched None needed 7 Jun Receipt 6,450 6,540 90 Two digits transposed: the ledger shows 6,540 10 Jun Direct debit 1,980 No entry 1,980 On the statement only 12 Jun No line Cheque 3,200 3,200 In the ledger only: the cheque has not been presented 18 Jun Bank charge 215 No entry 215 A bank charge not yet booked 21 Jun Payment to Larkin Ltd 7,700 7,700 7,700 Matched None needed 28 Jun Receipt 18,000 18,000 booked 2 Jul 18,000 A timing difference across month end - Flagged
- 5 of 8 · GBP 23,485
- Needs action
- 0 · GBP 0
- Timing only
- 0 · GBP 0
- Undecided
- 5 · GBP 23,485
5 of 8 lines do not match; 0 need action, worth GBP 0.
Timing differences and cheques not yet presented clear on their own; a transposed figure and an unbooked charge need a journal [S1]. 0 marked as timing only stay out of the amount in question, and 5 are undecided.
Relies on: S1 · Bank statement and general ledger extract, June (fictional)
The treasury accountant decides. Approving raises the journals and queries for the items needing action. It does not post anything to the ledger or move money.
Not ready. 5 flagged lines are still undecided. Confirm or dismiss each one first.
Not done here. It does not post journals or move money: the accountant does, after reading each item.
Review the proposed changes to the customer terms
- What happened
- The product team has proposed changes to the terms of a current account, to take effect next quarter.
- The question
- Which proposed changes alter what the bank has promised its customers, and which are only wording? Asked by: Head of legal.
Review the proposed changes to the customer termsAccept or reject each change. The terms below are rebuilt from your decisions, and the changes that alter a promise to customers are marked.Open
Accept or reject each change. The terms below are rebuilt from your decisions, and the changes that alter a promise to customers are marked.
Accept or reject each change. The text below is rebuilt from the changes you accept, and changes that alter what people must do are marked.
Current account terms, section 6: charges and notice (fictional)
The bank will give customers two months' notice of any increase in charges.
Reworded Changes what people must do
The bank will give customers thirty days' notice of any increase in charges.
Shortens a notice period customers rely on.
Charges for returned payments are shown in the fee table.
Reworded
Charges for returned payments are set out in the fee table.
Wording only; no new promise.
Added Changes what people must do
A charge for a returned payment is taken from the account on the day it is incurred.
Adds when the charge is taken, which affects customers' balances.
Customers may close the account at any time without charge.
Removed Changes what people must do
Removes a promise about closing the account without charge.
The bank may change these terms for a valid reason by giving notice.
The text after your decisions (4 lines)
- The bank will give customers two months' notice of any increase in charges.
- Charges for returned payments are shown in the fee table.
- Customers may close the account at any time without charge.
- The bank may change these terms for a valid reason by giving notice.
4 proposed changes: 0 accepted, 0 rejected; 0 accepted change(s) alter what customers were promised.
A shortened notice period and a removed closing promise change what customers were told, so each needs legal and product sign-off, and a customer communication, before it takes effect [S1].
The wording-only change carries no new promise [S2]. The terms below are rebuilt from your decisions and have 4 lines.
Relies on: S1 · Proposed change list from the product team (fictional)S2 · Current account terms and conduct guidance (fictional)
The head of legal decides. Approving settles the wording to take to the product committee. It does not publish the terms or notify any customer.
Not ready. 4 changes are still undecided. Accept or reject each one first.
Not done here. It does not decide whether a change is fair to customers or lawful: legal and compliance do.
Test faster lending growth against the capital buffer
- What happened
- The board has asked what happens to the capital buffer if mortgage lending grows faster than planned while losses also rise.
- The question
- How far can lending grow and losses rise before the capital buffer falls below the board's floor? Asked by: Chief risk officer.
Test faster lending growth against the capital bufferChange the three assumptions. The buffer is recomputed, and a warning appears when it crosses the board's floor.Open
Change the three assumptions. The buffer is recomputed, and a warning appears when it crosses the board's floor.
Change the assumptions. Every result and the answer below are recomputed from them, and a warning appears when a result crosses a stated limit.
- New lending
- GBP 48,000,000On a book of 480,000,000.
- Earnings on it
- GBP 1,200,000
- Losses on it
- GBP 720,000
- Capital the new lending ties up
- GBP 3,840,000Eight percent of new lending.
- Capital buffer afterwards
- GBP 58,640,000From a buffer of 62,000,000 today.
Lending grows by GBP 48,000,000; after earnings, losses and the capital it ties up, the buffer is GBP 58,640,000.
The buffer falls below the board's floor when lending growth is high and losses rise together, not for either alone [S1].
These are single-year figures on stated assumptions, not a forecast [S2].
Relies on: S1 · Lending book, capital and the board's floor (fictional)S2 · Planning assumptions for next year (fictional)
The chief risk officer decides. Approving records these assumptions and the result for the board paper. It does not change the lending plan or any limit.
Ready.
Not done here. It does not forecast losses or set a limit: the board sets the floor and the risk committee sets the limits.
Where a person decides, and what is never done
Every example above ends with a named person approving it. Approving means exactly what is written here, and nothing more.
- SOP IntelligenceDecides: The head of branch operations with information securityApproving lets: Approving sets what the assistant may read for the pilot branches. It does not switch the assistant on, and it can be narrowed or revoked at any time.Never: It does not read restricted material or customer records, and it does not answer from a source a person has not classified.
- ComplianceDecides: The head of complianceApproving lets: Approving records the dependency picture in the control map. It does not change any control or report anything outside the bank.Never: It does not judge whether a control is adequate or report an incident anywhere: compliance officers decide both.
- Financial IntelligenceDecides: The treasury accountantApproving lets: Approving raises the journals and queries for the items needing action. It does not post anything to the ledger or move money.Never: It does not post journals or move money: the accountant does, after reading each item.
- Legal IntelligenceDecides: The head of legalApproving lets: Approving settles the wording to take to the product committee. It does not publish the terms or notify any customer.Never: It does not decide whether a change is fair to customers or lawful: legal and compliance do.
- Executive IntelligenceDecides: The chief risk officerApproving lets: Approving records these assumptions and the result for the board paper. It does not change the lending plan or any limit.Never: It does not forecast losses or set a limit: the board sets the floor and the risk committee sets the limits.
Always a person in banking
- A compliance officer decides whether a control is adequate; the platform shows the evidence, not the verdict.
- The head of operations decides when a branch moves to a revised procedure.
- Counsel decides what is said to a customer or to a regulator about a notice.
The capabilities behind these examples
- Govern the AI your organisation usesTeams adopt AI tools faster than anyone records them, who approved them or what they may touch.
- AutoDiscover from a folder you approveNobody has time to organise years of files before they can benefit from any tool.
- Ask questions of the approved proceduresPeople ask colleagues instead of reading, because finding the answer in a procedure is slow, and the colleague may be wrong.
- Continuous Control MonitoringEvaluate whether each control is operating: evidence present and current, expirations, exceptions and failures, so assurance is ongoing instead of a one-time checklist.
- Regulatory Change Impact IntelligenceWatch approved authoritative sources, detect changes that matter, identify the entities, processes, systems and controls they affect, and start a governed review and…
- Bank-to-Ledger ReconciliationMatch authorised bank transactions, accounting records, settlements and invoices, and find entries that are unmatched, duplicated, missing or delayed, with the matching…
- Financial Anomaly InvestigationsConnect unusual financial records with the invoices, payments, vendors, contracts and evidence around them, and support investigation, human decisions and a documented…
- Legal Drafting and Negotiation SupportReviewed first drafts, redlines, clause comparisons, playbooks and negotiation questions.
- Regulatory and Legal Change ImpactConnects verified regulatory developments to the contracts, processes, policies, entities and obligations they affect, and opens a governed review.
- What-If Decision SimulatorA person changes stated assumptions and sees the effect on verified baselines through documented formulas.
- Enterprise Risk RadarOne register of risks drawn from governed sources (overdue obligations, open findings, incidents, the trust gate), each with an owner and a rating by a stated method.
All industries · All demonstrations · Ask for a demonstration on your own sector
The other industries
- HealthcareClinical routines that are written down once, followed everywhere and checked in practice.
- ManufacturingLine procedures that survive a retirement, a new shift and a new product.
- InsuranceClaims and underwriting routines applied the same way by every handler.
- RetailStore routines that are the same on a busy Saturday in every shop.
- LogisticsDepot and driver procedures that hold across sites, subcontractors and seasons.
- TechnologyRunbooks and release routines that new engineers can follow and leaders can trust.
- EducationSafeguarding and operational routines every member of staff can find and follow.
- Professional servicesEngagement methods captured once, so quality does not depend on who is staffed.