What comes after the Board Diagnostic?

The Board Diagnostic gives your leadership team clarity — where you are, where the gaps are, and what to do in what order. What it cannot do is make it happen. That requires the right people alongside you as decisions get made, vendors get selected, programmes get launched, and your leadership team needs to govern all of it without losing the thread.

That is what this stage is for.

Advisory Retainer

Ongoing independent challenge and governance at board and SLT level.

Most organisations that complete a Board Diagnostic arrive at the same moment: they have a plan they believe in, a leadership team that has been through the process together, and a genuine readiness to move. What they do not have is certainty about what the next decision is, who should make it, and whether the people around the table have the capability to govern what follows.

This is the point at which independent advisory support is most valuable — not because the client cannot make decisions, but because the decisions that follow a diagnostic of this kind are the ones most likely to go wrong without structured, independent challenge at the moment they are made.

The Advisory engagement is not a retainer for its own sake. It is the continuation of a relationship that began with the Board Diagnostic — with the same person, the same depth of understanding of your organisation, and the same independence that made the diagnostic useful in the first place.

What this covers

Three things, bundled into one engagement. Activated as you need them.

The Advisory engagement covers three distinct but connected areas.

Not every client needs all three at the same time. The engagement is designed to flex around where your organisation is in its AI programme — and what your leadership team genuinely needs at each stage.

Advisory Retainer

Ongoing independent challenge and governance at board and SLT level.

This is the core of the engagement for most clients.

A structured monthly session with your leadership team — reviewing progress against the roadmap, challenging decisions before they are made rather than after, and ensuring the board retains an independent view of whether the programme is on track.

Between sessions I am available for the questions that cannot wait — the vendor proposal that arrived unexpectedly, the board paper that needs a second set of eyes, the decision that needs challenging before the meeting.

I am not a member of your leadership team.

I am not a project manager.

I am the independent voice in the room that has no stake in any particular outcome — and that independence is what makes the challenge worth listening to.

What this looks like in practice:

One structured session per month of up to two hours, in person or remote
Between-session availability for emerging questions and decisions
Progress tracking against the Board Diagnostic roadmap at every session
Board paper and governance document review on request
Honest escalation when the programme is drifting from what was agreed

Priced per engagement, based on scope and cadence. A scoping call is required before any retainer is confirmed.

Minimum three-month commitment. Rolling monthly thereafter.

Implementation Governance

Independent oversight of your AI programme — vendor selection, procurement, and delivery.

The Board Diagnostic identifies what needs to be built. Implementation Governance ensures it gets built correctly — by the right people, to the right standard, at the right cost.

This is not project management. I do not manage vendors. I do not attend every implementation call. I do not sit in your team's steering committee as a permanent fixture.

What I do is provide the board with an independent view of whether the programme is on track — and escalate clearly and early when it is not.

The distinction matters. A project manager is accountable for delivery. I am accountable to your board for the honest assessment of whether delivery is happening correctly. Those are different roles, and conflating them creates the kind of conflict of interest that makes advisory less valuable, not more.

What this looks like in practice:

Vendor selection support — defining criteria, reviewing proposals, identifying risk
Procurement oversight — reviewing commercial terms and flagging misalignment
Attendance at defined governance touchpoints — steering group, milestone reviews, board reporting
Independent assessment of whether the programme is delivering against the roadmap
Escalation to your board when the programme is at risk

Priced per engagement based on programme scope and duration.

A scoping call is required before any governance engagement is confirmed.

Leadership Training

Building the AI capability your leadership team needs to govern and sustain what you are building.

A board can commission an AI programme. Governing it well — making sound decisions about vendor selection, data ethics, regulatory compliance, workforce implications, and strategic alignment — requires a different kind of capability. One that most leadership teams in regulated financial services do not yet have.

The Madurez AI Leadership Programme is not a generic AI awareness course. It is a structured, facilitated programme designed specifically for boards and senior leadership teams — drawing on the same six-pillar methodology as the Board Diagnostic, grounded in doctoral research.

It is built around your organisation's maturity profile from the Board Diagnostic — so your leadership team is not sitting through content they already know or material that is not relevant to where they are.

What this looks like in practice:

Programme design specific to your sector, your maturity profile, and your leadership audience
All sessions facilitated by Dr. Jullian Shawcross
Structured reflection exercises tied to your specific roadmap priorities

Per-delegate from £1,300 (minimum three delegates).

Block rates available for firm-wide programmes.

Cohort format (8–15 delegates) or bespoke single-organisation delivery.

Tagline

How the three connect

These are not three separate products. They are three expressions of the same ongoing relationship — with the same person, the same methodology, and the same independence.

In practice, most clients begin with the Advisory Retainer immediately after the Board Diagnostic — because the first decisions that follow the roadmap are the most consequential and benefit most from independent challenge. Implementation Governance is typically activated when a specific programme or vendor engagement begins. Training is introduced when the leadership team's capability gap becomes the binding constraint on progress.

Some clients need all three simultaneously. Some need only one. The engagement is structured to serve what you actually need — not to maximise the hours I bill.

What these stages are not

Being ready for advisory, implementation, or training services is dependent on where your journey with Madurez sits.....

This is not implementation.

I do not build, code, migrate, or execute.

The architect principle that governs the Board Diagnostic governs this engagement equally.

I design, govern, challenge, and train.

The building is done by your teams and your vendors.

This is not open-ended.

Every element of this engagement is scoped in writing before it begins.

Monthly retainers have a defined scope.

Governance engagements have defined touchpoints.

Training programmes have a defined curriculum and duration.

Nothing expands without a conversation and a signed instruction.

This is not for every organisation.

The Advisory engagement is the continuation of a Board Diagnostic relationship. I do not take on advisory clients who have not been through the diagnostic process — because without that shared understanding of where your organisation is and what the roadmap contains, the advisory has no foundation.

If you have completed a Board Diagnostic and are ready to discuss what comes next, I would welcome that conversation.

If you have not yet completed a Board Diagnostic, that is where to start.