Structured governance update
Keyed to the IPS with cited policy language and identified gaps against prior practice.
- Reviewed by
- Principal and IC chair
- Defensibility
- Structured read, not a rewrite — gaps cited on both sides.
Governance · Workflow
Family-governance memorandum for teams that need source-backed financial judgment.
A structured read of investment policy, family constitution, and prior IC minutes — with a decision log the next generation can read without explanation.
Closed-system workflow. Source-backed outputs. Versioned review.
Engagement console
Source intake through review state
Source intake
- S-014 · PPM.pdfadmitted
- S-021 · LPA.pdfadmitted
- S-028 · DDQ.xlsxscanning
Workflow stage
decision log
Stage running · citations required
Evidence anchors
[S-014 · p.42 ¶3][S-021 · cl. 8.2][S-028 · tab 3]
Open risks
IPS–practice gap
severity · high · cited
Draft artifact
Governance memo · v1 draft
schema valid · 47 claims cited
Review state
Partner review
Awaiting challenge before lock
Governance breaks down when policy documents and prior practice are never read together.
Family governance draws on the investment policy statement, constitution drafts, distribution policy, and prior IC minutes. Partners know what was decided; the documents may say something else. Internal shorthand in minutes is opaque to the next generation. The instrument is a structured read — not a rewrite — but gaps between IPS and practice must be explicit, with citations on both sides.
- IPS language is assumed to match prior practice without a cited comparison
- IC minutes use shorthand that the next generation cannot read standalone
- Constitution drafts and distribution policy are reviewed in isolation
- Decision rationale is oral history, not a durable written record
- Governance updates are bespoke memos with no repeatable structure
Who uses this workflow
Built for senior finance teams who need committee-ready artifacts — not chat transcripts.
- Family office principal
Use caseGenerational transition planning
Moment of needThe next generation needs to understand prior decisions and policy language
OutputDecision log in plain language
- Investment committee chair
Use caseAnnual governance review
Moment of needIPS language and prior practice may have diverged
OutputStructured governance update keyed to the IPS
- External counsel
Use caseConstitution rewrite support
Moment of needExisting documents must be read before drafting changes
OutputPolicy review extract with cited language
- Next-generation member
Use caseOnboarding to family investment governance
Moment of needInternal shorthand in minutes is unreadable without context
OutputPlain-language decision log with rationale beside each call
Admitted source envelope
Source materials enter the engagement as a controlled register — scanned, classified, and scoped before the workflow runs.
Source register
Pending admission · scanner gate
| Source | Description | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Existing investment policy statement (IPS) | Existing investment policy statement (IPS). | 01 |
| Drafts of the family constitution, where present | Drafts of the family constitution, where present. | 02 |
| Prior investment-committee minutes. | 03 | |
| Distribution policy. | 04 |
Workflow process
A versioned pipeline — each stage records what happened, what you can review, and what output it produces.
Stage pipeline
Topological DAG · runtime enforced
01
Admit governance source materials
IPS, constitution drafts, distribution policy, and prior IC minutes enter the envelope.
- Recorded
- Source admission with hash per document.
- Review
- Principal confirms the document set reflects current governance state.
- Output
- Admitted governance source register.
02
Extract policy language and decision rights
policy_review extracts governance bodies, decision rights, and language from IPS, constitution, and distribution policy.
- Recorded
- Policy extract with cited spans per document.
- Review
- Counsel verifies extract against source documents.
- Output
- Policy review extract.
03
Build the decision log
decision_log reads prior IC minutes against the policy review; calls and rationale recorded in plain language.
- Recorded
- Decision entries with minute citations and expanded rationale.
- Review
- Partner edits shorthand into language the next generation can read.
- Output
- Plain-language decision log.
04
Surface IPS–practice gaps
Disagreements between IPS language and prior practice surfaced with citations on both sides.
- Recorded
- Gap callouts with dual citations.
- Review
- Principal decides which gaps require policy or practice change.
- Output
- Gap register on the memorandum cover.
05
Synthesise the governance memorandum
synthesise composes governance memorandum and decision log.
- Recorded
- Draft version and validation result.
- Review
- Partner sign-off — the workflow does not propose IPS changes.
- Output
- Governance memorandum draft.
06
Lock the version
Signed version locked with audit trail.
- Recorded
- memorandum.locked event.
- Review
- Partner name on the document.
- Output
- Locked governance artifact.
Workflow outputs
Committee-ready artifacts — each with a named reviewer and a defensibility standard.
Decision log
Calls the family has made — investment, distribution, governance — with rationale beside each in plain language.
- Reviewed by
- Principal and next-generation members
- Defensibility
- Internal shorthand expanded; rationale stands without oral context.
Governance documents are read together — gaps between policy and practice are explicit.
The workflow does not propose IPS changes on the family's behalf. Decision rationale is taken from minutes — not inferred. Partner review is recorded before lock.
- Instrument is a structured read — not a policy rewrite
- Decision log written for readers who were not in the room
- IPS–practice gaps cite both the IPS span and the minute span
- Partner review before the memorandum leaves the chamber
Diligence OS supports investment judgment. It does not make investment decisions, provide investment advice, or guarantee risk detection.
Why not generic AI
Prompt-based tools produce inconsistent outputs with weak provenance. This workflow runs a structured process with an admitted source envelope and a versioned review path.
| Dimension | Generic AI | Diligence OS |
|---|---|---|
| Starting point | Chat-first | Workflow-first |
| Process | User-defined prompts | Versioned process |
| Provenance | Weak provenance | Source-span citations |
| Across documents | One file at a time | The full set reconciled; contradictions surfaced |
| Review | Hard to review | Partner review states |
| Outputs | Inconsistent outputs | Repeatable artifacts |
| Memory | No durable workflow memory | Append-only audit trail |
| Committee use | Difficult to defend | Committee-ready outputs |
| Governance memory | Chat summaries of policies | Decision log + IPS gap register with citations |
Starting point
Generic AIChat-first
Diligence OSWorkflow-first
Process
Generic AIUser-defined prompts
Diligence OSVersioned process
Provenance
Generic AIWeak provenance
Diligence OSSource-span citations
Across documents
Generic AIOne file at a time
Diligence OSThe full set reconciled; contradictions surfaced
Review
Generic AIHard to review
Diligence OSPartner review states
Outputs
Generic AIInconsistent outputs
Diligence OSRepeatable artifacts
Memory
Generic AINo durable workflow memory
Diligence OSAppend-only audit trail
Committee use
Generic AIDifficult to defend
Diligence OSCommittee-ready outputs
Governance memory
Generic AIChat summaries of policies
Diligence OSDecision log + IPS gap register with citations
Business value
Institutional outcomes — not productivity slogans.
- Preserve institutional memory across generational transitions
- Make IPS–practice gaps explicit before a constitution rewrite
- Produce decision logs readable without oral explanation
- Standardize annual governance review structure
- Improve counsel efficiency with cited policy extracts
- Create a defensible governance record for family and IC
Security and control
Closed by construction — each engagement runs inside a dedicated chamber with an append-only audit trail.
- Closed-system workflow — each engagement runs in an isolated chamber
- Engagement-level isolation with row-level tenant scoping
- Source-controlled review — partners read drafts against the audit log
- No training on customer documents — ever, by anyone
- Citation-backed artifacts with hash-verified source spans
- Versioned workflow history preserved on every run
- Audit trail on reads, retrievals, model calls, and locks
- Reviewer traceability — partner review recorded before sign-off
Related workflows
Adjacent diligence processes in the same controlled system.
Request an introduction
Diligence OS is introduced through a controlled evaluation process. No public signup. No self-serve access.