Implement
Put GOVBRM to work in your organisation.
What an engagement looks like, what it produces, what you provide, and how a pilot is set up. Priced per engagement.
GOVBRM enterprise implementation offer
Status: draft v0.1, GOVBRM original, not yet validated.. No engagement has yet been delivered.
What the offer is
An engagement that puts the GOVBRM demand front door inside a client organisation and wires it into the governance the client already runs. The client keeps its business case process, its privacy and equality assessments, its security assurance, its procurement, its transparency records and its service assessments. GOVBRM adds the layer that shapes each AI request before it reaches them, routes it to them in the right order, and checks afterwards that the value arrived.
Six components, offered together or selected.
| Component | What it delivers | Label |
|---|---|---|
| Demand front door | The six gates (Request, Shape, Rank, Commit, Build, Review), the three lanes (fast, standard, strategic) and the twenty canvases, adapted to the client's roles, sign-offs and scoring scales, and running on real requests | GOVBRM original |
| Governance integration | A cross-framework compiler for the client: a table that maps every canvas field to the input each receiving process needs (business case, privacy, equality, security, procurement, transparency record, service assessment, architecture, AI assurance), so that one demand record feeds each of them without re-keying | GOVBRM original; the crosswalk to named frameworks is Adapted from those frameworks' published requirements |
| Maturity assessment | A baseline of how the organisation shapes, decides, delivers and realises AI demand today, against the GOVBRM maturity model, with the gaps that the implementation must close | Adapted (capability maturity assessment); the GOVBRM model is a Hypothesis |
| Portfolio design | The AI Portfolio Heatmap (08) populated with everything in flight, the AI Demand Value Map (06) for the coming quarter, and the AI Capability Roadmap (20) at twelve, twenty-four and thirty-six months | GOVBRM original |
| Value measurement | Benefit types, baselines, measurement owners and the evidence ledger for every committed item (18), and the Value Realisation Review (19) booked at Commit, by default at month nine | Adapted (benefits management) |
| Closed cohort | A cohort of up to twelve client staff taken through the Certified AI Demand Strategist and Certified AI Value Orchestrator masterclasses on the client's own cases | Adapted (cohort-based certification) |
Phases, deliverables and timeline
Indicative timeline: 12 to 24 weeks from kick-off to handover, depending on how many governance processes are in scope and how quickly the client can supply people. The weeks below are ranges, not commitments; no engagement has yet run to calibrate them.
| Phase | Weeks | Activity | Deliverables |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 Discover | 2 to 4 | Maturity assessment interviews and document review; inventory of live AI requests and in-flight items; map of the client's governance processes and their entry requirements | Maturity baseline; demand inventory; governance map |
| 2 Design | 3 to 5 | Adapt gates, lanes, scoring scales and sign-off roles to the client; build the cross-framework compiler table; agree evidence and records handling with the client's data protection officer and records team | Client operating model for the front door; compiler table; evidence and retention standard; decision on which lane each in-flight item enters |
| 3 Pilot run | 4 to 8 | Run every new AI request in one directorate or portfolio through the six gates using the canvases; facilitate shaping sessions; hand off into the client's governance with references recorded; hold the first Rank gate with leadership using the heatmap | Signed canvases for every request; Rank gate record; first portfolio moves; handoff log |
| 4 Cohort | Runs inside phase 3 | Two certificates, two live masterclasses each, on the client's own cases | Certified practitioners, badges and registry entries |
| 5 Handover | 2 to 4 | Client staff run the gates unaided; playbooks (10) written for the request categories seen; review dates booked; learning captured | Playbooks; booked Value Realisation Reviews; handover note; findings for the client's board |
| 6 Review | At month nine after the first go-live | Facilitate the first Value Realisation Reviews | Review decisions and the loop learning into the front door |
Roles
| Role | Provided by | Responsibility |
|---|---|---|
| Engagement lead | GOVBRM | Design, facilitation, compiler build, cohort delivery, quality of the evidence |
| Executive sponsor | Client | Owns the ambition; chairs the Rank gate; countersigns funding changes at Review |
| Front door owner | Client | A Business Relationship Manager or demand lead who will run the gates after handover; attends every session |
| Governance process owners | Client | One named contact for each receiving process: business case, privacy, equality, security, procurement, transparency, service assessment, architecture, AI assurance |
| Finance business partner | Client | Baselines, benefit types and the committed number |
| Data protection officer and records lead | Client | Approve evidence handling, retention and any processing of personal data in the canvases |
| Cohort participants | Client | Up to twelve people who will shape and own AI demand |
What the client provides
- Access to the people listed above for the hours agreed in the statement of work.
- Its live AI requests, in-flight items and the documents its governance processes already require.
- A place to hold the evidence: the toolkit stores canvases on the practitioner's own device, so the client must file signed exports in its own records system.
- Decisions at the gates. GOVBRM structures the decision; the client's named roles take it.
- Any licences for the client's own platforms. GOVBRM supplies no software.
Out of scope
- Any decision that belongs to statutory or policy governance: lawfulness, privacy, security, ethics approval, funding approval, procurement award.
- Building, hosting, procuring or configuring AI systems, models or platforms.
- Drafting the client's data protection impact assessment, business case, security case or transparency record. GOVBRM supplies the inputs; the client's owners write and sign the documents.
- Legal, accounting or regulatory advice.
- Accreditation or audit of the client against any standard.
- Anything requiring the engagement lead to hold a security clearance or to process special category data.
Pricing
Per engagement, quoted. A quote is built from the phases selected, the number of governance processes in scope, the number of requests expected through the pilot run and the cohort size. Membership, single seats and the portfolio assessment keep their published prices (GBP) and are not bundled into the quote unless stated.
Pilot terms
Offered because no implementation has yet run, and the client should know that.
- Scope: one directorate or one portfolio, one quarter, every new AI request through the six gates.
- Evidence the pilot must produce: count of requests received, declined, redirected to existing capability, committed with a named owner and number; time from request to route; what each governance process received that it did not before; the client's own view of the burden added or removed. No claim will be made beyond what these counts support.
- Publication: nothing is published, quoted or named without the client's written consent. Anonymised counts may be reported with consent.
- Exit: either party may end the pilot at the end of any phase with notice agreed in the statement of work; canvases and evidence remain the client's.
- Honesty clause: the client is told in writing that the method is a GOVBRM original, that its scoring scales are initial calibration published to be argued with, that no independent validation exists and that the engagement lead is a sole trader.
What has not been established
- No engagement has been delivered, so the timeline, roles and deliverables are a Hypothesis.
- The cross-framework compiler exists as a crosswalk on the website and as canvas handoff tables; it has not been built for a real client.
- The maturity model has not been applied to any organisation.
GOVBRM commercial proposition
Status: draft v0.1, GOVBRM original, not yet validated.
This document sets out the ladder of GOVBRM offers, who each is for, what is priced and what is not, the positioning statements to test, and a plan for testing them. No results are claimed. No customers, pilots or testimonials exist at the date of this draft.
The ladder
| Rung | What it includes | Who buys it | Price (GBP) | Label |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Free | Free membership of the GOVBRM Newsletter on Substack: the essays, the access code for the three Tier 1 micro-courses (AI Demand Foundation, AI Value Associate, Responsible AI Practitioner), each with a certificate of completion and a digital badge, the public verification registry, the crosswalk, provenance and accessibility pages | Anyone curious; Business Relationship Managers, demand leads and product people testing whether the method fits their world | Free. Micro-courses free during the beta, usually 4.99 (GBP) each | Established practice (free tier plus paid content) |
| Individual | Paid membership: the full AI Demand Framework (thirteen chapters), the AI Demand Toolkit (twenty canvases, stored on the member's own device), first call and a discount on masterclass places. Founding membership adds every live masterclass, both practitioner certificates and the Master AI Value Partner portfolio assessment when it opens | One practitioner paying personally or on expenses; the person the AI request lands on | Monthly 25 (GBP); annual 250 (GBP); founding: to be set publicly (currently offered on Substack) | Established practice |
| Team | Several seats on one certificate cohort, or a closed cohort of up to twelve people from one organisation, working their own demand cases through the gates. Two live online masterclasses per certificate, 14:00 to 18:00 UK time, individual case analysis assessed against the published rubric, knowledge check, certificate, badge and registry entry | A head of BRM, a portfolio office, a digital or data directorate that wants a shared way of shaping AI demand | Single seat 495 (GBP) per certificate, paid through Stripe. Closed cohort: to be set | Adapted (cohort-based professional certification) |
| Enterprise | Implementation of the demand front door inside the client's governance: the six gates, the three lanes, the canvases wired into the client's business case, privacy, security, procurement, transparency and service assessment processes; maturity assessment; portfolio design; value measurement; a closed cohort for the people who will run it. See GOVBRM enterprise implementation offer | A chief information, digital, data or AI officer, or a transformation director, with a portfolio of AI demand and several governance queues to route it through | Per engagement, quoted | GOVBRM original; Hypothesis until a pilot has run |
| Professional services | Advisory days, facilitation of shaping sessions and Value Realisation Reviews, review of a client's own business cases and canvases, adaptation of the gates and scoring to a client's governance, speaking and internal briefings | Organisations that want the method applied to one hard item, or one quarter's demand, without a full implementation | Day rate: to be set. | Established practice |
| Future | A platform in which one demand record produces multiple governance outputs (see GOVBRM platform architecture concept); Tier 3 Master AI Value Partner portfolio assessment (opens 2027, 150 (GBP) or included with founding membership); a Method Council; a partner or licensed-trainer route; localised editions for the US, EU, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa | Existing members and enterprise clients first | To be set. Nothing here is built or committed | Hypothesis |
Notes on the ladder.
- Membership is billed by Substack and seats and assessments by Stripe, each in local currency. GBP figures are a reference.
Positioning statements to test
Three statements, each written to be read aloud to a buyer and judged by what they say back.
| Use | Statement | Intended audience | What it must do |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | The operating layer between AI demand and AI delivery | Government executives, CIO and CDO functions, transformation leaders | Explain in one line where GOVBRM sits: not delivery, not governance, but the layer that connects request to realised value |
| Alternative | A front door for AI demand that connects business need, risk, investment, delivery and realised value | AI governance teams, commercial and procurement, digital leaders who already run intake | Describe the mechanism, not the position, for people who distrust abstractions |
| BRM-specific | The operating system for BRMs managing AI demand | Business Relationship Managers, heads of BRM, the BRM professional community | Claim the BRM discipline as the home of the method and give the practitioner a reason to belong |
All three are GOVBRM original. None has been tested. Each carries a known risk: "operating layer" and "operating system" can sound like software when no software exists; "front door" can sound like a helpdesk. The testing plan below is designed to find out which of these risks is real.
Message-testing plan
Purpose: to learn which statement each audience understands, believes and repeats, before any statement is fixed on the website, in the framework or in sales material.
Script, in order.
- Ask the person to describe, in their own words, what happens today when someone in their organisation asks for AI.
- Show one statement. Ask: what do you think this is? Who is it for? What would you expect to receive?
- Repeat for the other two statements.
- Ask which statement they would repeat to a colleague, and how they would say it.
- Ask what would make them distrust the claim.
- Ask what evidence would make them believe it.
Record, for each statement and each audience: comprehension (could they restate it correctly), relevance (did they place themselves inside it), credibility (what they would need to see), preferred wording (their own phrase), and objections. Score nothing numerically; capture phrases.
| Audience | Why they matter | What to listen for | Who to ask (types, not names) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Government executives | Own the ambition and answer to a minister, board or executive for value | Whether "demand" and "value" land, or whether they hear another governance layer | Directors and deputy directors with an AI ambition and a budget |
| Business Relationship Managers | The practitioners the method was written for | Whether the BRM-specific statement makes them feel seen or boxed in | Members of BRM professional communities; heads of BRM |
| Digital leaders | Run delivery and feel demand arriving unshaped | Whether "operating layer" reads as help or as interference | Heads of digital, product and service |
| CIO and CDO functions | Hold the portfolio, the architecture and the data | Whether they see a fit with intake they already run | Portfolio office leads, enterprise architects, data governance leads |
| AI governance teams | Own the assurance processes GOVBRM routes into | Whether "connects" is heard as respect or as overreach | Responsible AI leads, ethics boards, assurance teams |
| Commercial and procurement | Receive requests that name a supplier before a need | Whether the front door would reduce or add to their work | Category managers, commercial business partners |
| Transformation leaders | Own change, adoption and benefits | Whether "realised value" is credible and how they measure it today | Change and benefits leads, programme directors |
Timeline: 8 to 12 weeks for all seven audiences, run in parallel where possible. Output: a short findings note per audience and one recommendation on the primary statement, with the phrases people actually used. No finding is published, quoted or attributed without the person's written consent.
What has not been established
- No price point has been tested with a buyer.
- No organisation has bought a team or enterprise rung.
- The positioning statements have not been read to anyone outside the project.