The Challenge

An employee used ChatGPT with client data. A regulator inquired about your AI oversight. The board read about AI risks and wants assurance you're managing them. Any of these scenarios demand governance frameworks that didn't exist yesterday.

The instinct is to ban AI tools while committees deliberate. But prohibition drives usage underground while competitors capture productivity gains. You need guardrails that enable responsible use, not policies that pretend AI doesn't exist.

The Approach

Emergency governance establishes the minimum viable policy framework that addresses immediate risks while creating space for thoughtful long-term development. It's about being defensibly responsible without being paralyzed.

The protocol prioritizes: What do we absolutely need to control right now? What can we explicitly permit with guidelines? What requires further evaluation before deciding? Clear categories beat comprehensive policies when time matters.

Core Principles

Four principles guide emergency AI governance development:

  • Risk Triage Not Risk EliminationIdentify the handful of AI uses that pose genuine organizational risk versus the many that don't. Emergency governance focuses on preventing catastrophic outcomes, not optimizing every scenario. Perfection is the enemy of protection.
  • Explicit Permission with BoundariesTell people what they CAN do with AI, not just what they can't. Prohibition without alternatives guarantees workarounds. Permitted use with clear guardrails creates compliance because it enables productivity.
  • Escalation Paths Over Comprehensive RulesYou can't anticipate every AI scenario. Build clear escalation paths for edge cases rather than trying to document every possibility. When in doubt, here's who decides becomes more useful than here's the rule.
  • Documentation for DefenseIn a crisis, what matters is demonstrating reasonable care. Document your governance rationale, not just your rules. Show you thought about risks, made defensible decisions, and created review mechanisms.

Application Example

Healthcare Consulting Firm: 21-Day Governance Response

Challenge: A client discovered their PHI had been processed through an AI tool by a consultant. The firm had no AI policy. The client demanded evidence of governance within 30 days or threatened contract termination across all engagements.
Application: Emergency protocol established three-tier classification: prohibited uses involving protected data, permitted uses with specific tools and audit trails, and escalation-required uses needing partner approval. The firm presented comprehensive governance documentation in 21 days. The client relationship survived and became a case study for proactive AI management.

Implementation Scope

Timeline compressed for regulatory or incident response:

3-7

Assessment Phase

Days to identify critical risks, current AI usage patterns, and immediate policy gaps

2-4

Implementation

Weeks to deploy essential policies, communication, and monitoring mechanisms

2-4

Optimization

Weeks for feedback integration and transition to comprehensive governance development