AI Outcomes for E&C

When governance and regulations are aligned, E&C efforts can shift from building the systems to reaping its dividends. Introducing AI can have organization-wide impacts on lowering operating expenses, expanding capacity, and reducing residual risk.

AI OUTCOMES FOR E&C

The impact extends to E&C teams as well, creating an opportunity to make improvements where it matters – in time, cost, precision, and capacity.

Here's how integrating AI can make a difference:

BOTTOM LINE:

Integrating AI into ethics and compliance workflows can deliver organization-wide benefits while directly improving E&C team performance. The core value-add lies in greater efficiency, lower costs, improved precision, and stronger defensibility of decisions.

Emerging Use Cases

When it comes to program implementation, it can be hard to know where to start. Governance creates the framework for assigning ownership, making approvals, and analyzing evidence to ensure that workflows are consistent and repeatable.

This section outlines practical use cases, the controls that make them defensible, and concise steps to create measurable value. Choose the outcomes that matter most for your organization and design workflows based on risk and effort.

Build momentum with small wins and documented results.

Investigations Triage

WHAT IT IS

AI can translate, summarize, and classify new reports to give investigators structured facts rather than raw narratives. Routing and de-duplication help the right team act sooner.

WHY IT MATTERS

Less time is spent on intake and assignment, allowing more time to be dedicated to the investigation itself. Assigning related reports to the same investigator ensures consistency in the process, promoting organizational justice.

OUTCOMES

Time ↓ (faster triage and shorter cycles)
Cost ↓ (less manual sorting/translation)
False alarms ↓ / Precision ↑ (better severity classification, linking of related reports)
Speed to decision ↑ (clearer first pass for reviewers, better pattern visibility)
Auditability ↑ (source + output logs retained)

GUARDRAILS

Do:

Ground triage in approved sources and keep the original reporter's submission attached to the case

Define the purpose and data scope during intake, noting ownership and review date

Require HITL review for severity classification, protected classes, and high-risk geographies

Test for accuracy, bias, and hallucinations before launch and after any material changes

Document prompts, versions, and decisions for defensibility

Don't:

Automate assignment or closure of high-impact cases without human review

Source facts from the open web or use unvetted data

Store/share personal information beyond what is allowed by your policy and retention rules

Deploy an AI workflow without a fallback or rollback plan

Train models using case data without explicit approval and data privacy controls

AI-Enabled Risk Signals in Text and Documents

WHAT IT IS

AI gives structure to unstructured content, including case narratives, emails to shared mailboxes, third-party documents, and disclosures, allowing patterns and hotspots to emerge earlier.

WHY IT MATTERS

E&C can avoid sifting through noise and instead focus their efforts on direct interventions with business units or vendors that need attention.

OUTCOMES

False alarms ↓ / Precision ↑ (smarter patterning and grouping)
Time ↓ (less sifting through noise)
Speed to decision ↑ (earlier visibility of hotspots)
Auditability ↑ (thresholds, prompts, and decisions logged)
Coverage ↑ (more content sources brought into scope)

GUARDRAILS

Do:

Define limits, data source scope, and thresholds with your Legal and Risk teams

Require HITL for any action with substantial impact

Link or group related reports and explain and document the rationale for doing so

Test for accuracy, bias, and hallucinations

Document change control and define re-testing triggers

Don't:

“Turn it on everywhere” without defining the scope of data sources or assessing for privacy impacts when required

Trigger sanctions or HR actions from red flags raised by AI without human review

Treat unexplainable outputs as indisputable facts

Retain unnecessary, identifying, or sensitive personal data in the tool’s knowledge or reference base

Engage in excessive or intrusive monitoring that goes beyond legitimate business needs or violates an employee's right to privacy

AI as Your Partner for Program Analytics

WHAT IT IS

Ask natural-language questions about program effectiveness or health regarding timelines, substantiation, disclosures, and more. Leverage AI to help you assemble analysis, visuals, and narratives for your presentations and reports.

WHY IT MATTERS

Stakeholders and leadership receive actionable insights instead of dashboards, and analysts have more time to delve deeper into the data.

OUTCOMES

Time ↓ (fewer ad-hoc pulls and manual analysis)
Speed to decision ↑ (board-ready answers faster)
Cost ↓ (analyst time redirected to higher-value work)
Coverage ↑ (consistent KPIs across more datasets)
Auditability ↑ (traceable analyses from system of record)

GUARDRAILS

Do:

Aggregate and anonymize data, removing personally identifying information

Anchor answers to your system of record and retain clear documentation of the analysis and decision-making processes

Use consistent, approved, and documented KPI definitions

Require human review for conclusions

Document all prompts, datasets, and versions for retention and defensibility

Don't:

Present AI-generated insights as final without human validation or review

Export raw case data to external AI or business intelligence tools without data privacy controls

Redefine KPIs to fit a particular narrative

AI-Assisted Reporting

WHAT IT IS

Use secure voice or web intake assistants to guide reporters through a natural conversation or structured intake flow to capture all key details and generate a clear, structured case summary that is translated and transcribed for the investigator.

WHY IT MATTERS

Leveraging an automated intake process can lower friction for reporters, improve clarity and understanding for case handlers, and expand language access.

OUTCOMES

Coverage ↑ (more languages, constant access)
Time ↓ (structured, complete reports at intake)
False alarms ↓ / Precision ↑ (fewer misroutes due to missing details)
Speed to decision ↑ (ready-to-review case packets)
Cost ↓ (reduced rework and intake effort)
Auditability ↑ (transcripts and structured records)

GUARDRAILS

Do:

Provide clear consent, confidentiality options, and anonymity wherever allowed

Guide reporters to share all relevant information to understand the full picture and preserve the original submission in alignment with company retention policies

Restrict the tool’s knowledge base to approved policies and prompts

Make the tool available in all languages used by employees, and ensure it can be accessed on different devices and is easy to use

Document interactions and versions and enable quality sampling

Don't:

Pull from external sources or the open web during the intake process

Collect unnecessary sensitive data beyond the legitimate business need or purpose

Ask leading questions that could steer, bias, or skew allegations

Automate assignment of severity categories without review

AI-Anonymization for Confidentiality at Scale

WHAT IT IS

Anonymizing reports by automating the removal or masking of personal identifiers in reports and attachments, in accordance with retention rules that apply in your jurisdiction.

WHY IT MATTERS

Automating the process lowers manual workload, strengthens privacy protections, and increases trust with reporters and other individuals named in cases.

OUTCOMES

Time ↓ (no manual redaction)
Cost ↓ (lower effort to meet retention/privacy rules)
Auditability ↑ (documented masking actions and reversals)
Residual risk ↓ (safer sharing via data minimization)

GUARDRAILS

Do:

Define masking rules by case type and jurisdiction rules

Test for over- and under-masking and document exceptions and fixes

Allow for controlled unmasking with role-based access

Apply retention, deletion, and documentation rules and processes consistently

Document version and rule changes

Don't:

Make masking irreversible when law or policy may require unmasking under authority

Mask case handlers, approvers, or audit fields needed for accountability

Rely on automation alone without human review or auditing

Change retention or masking rules without notice or approval

Store original submissions (whether masked or unmasked) in unsecured repositories

Policy Q&A Assistant

WHAT IT IS

Leveraging an AI assistant to answer policy questions in plain language, that is grounded in your approved language and includes links back to the actual policies or Code of Conduct.

WHY IT MATTERS

Employees would not need to find and read a policy to adhere to it. This allows employees to easily understand the expectations outlined in policies and the Code of Conduct and reduces questions to the E&C team.

OUTCOMES

Speed to decision ↑ (instant, cited guidance)
False alarms ↓ / Precision ↑ (fewer misinterpretation-driven escalations)
Coverage ↑ (self-service access for all employees)
Time ↓ (fewer repeat inquiries to E&C)
Auditability ↑ (questions and citations are documented)

GUARDRAILS

Do:

Ground answers in the actual language of your policies and link to the applicable policy or Code of Conduct

Include disclaimers and escalate human review protocols for complex or high-risk queries

Document questions asked and use patterns to inform training needs

Ensure data security and adhere to your retention and data privacy and security policies

Version and test prompt templates and review for bias, accuracy, and clarity

Don't:

Allow the tool to invent policy guidance or offer legal advice beyond the scope of your policies

Pull from the open web or non-approved sources

Answer questions on topics outside the defined policy library

Make material changes to responses or models without following protocols or approval

Regulatory Change Intelligence

WHAT IT IS

Continuous monitoring of relevant laws and guidance with AI-assisted summaries that track changes and predict the impact those changes will have on E&C programs.

WHY IT MATTERS

E&C stays ahead of regulatory changes and can prioritize updates by impact rather than headline, staying proactive in identifying potential gaps in their programs.

OUTCOMES

Time ↓ (faster impact mapping)
Speed to decision ↑ (prioritized action lists)
Coverage ↑ (more jurisdictions tracked consistently)
Auditability ↑ (traceability from change → policy/control updates)
Cost ↓ (targeted research vs. broad manual reviews)

GUARDRAILS

Do:

Curate authoritative, trusted sources and publish the list

Require human validation before actions

Map changes and regulatory updates to impact, owner, and due date

Document evidence and justification for changes, including citations, timestamps, and jurisdiction

Set a cadence and triggers for updates and document whether updates are adopted, monitored, or deferred

Don't:

Pull from unvetted or unreliable sources or the open web

Treat AI summaries as final legal positions

Release summaries of updates without assigning ownership or follow-through

Include excerpts without context or documentation, such as links, dates, or jurisdiction

Release summaries that include conflicting requirements without human review to determine how to resolve the conflicting laws

Compliance Knowledge Assistant

WHAT IT IS

A generative AI assistant for the E&C team that is grounded in your approved knowledge base of policies, procedures, controls, Code of Conduct, guidance, playbooks, training, prior board reports, and select legal memos. Use the assistant to answer questions, draft briefs, pull reference material, and assemble information for reporting.

WHY IT MATTERS

The assistant can reduce research time, improve consistency of guidance, preserve established practices and experiences, and accelerate onboarding without relying on the Legal team or senior SMEs to answer repeat questions.

OUTCOMES

Speed to decision ↑ (quicker, cited answers for policy or process questions)
Time ↓ (less ad-hoc SME research)
Coverage ↑ (broader access to institutional knowledge)
Auditability ↑ (documented questions and answers with sources)
False alarms ↓ / Precision ↑ (fewer misinterpretations when guidance is cited)

GUARDRAILS

Do:

Ground responses in your approved knowledge base and require citations or links to resources

Enforce role-based access to sensitive documents to ensure data privacy

Document questions and answers and review them for gaps or policy update opportunities

Document evidence and justification for changes, including citations, timestamps, and jurisdiction

Test for bias, safety, and accuracy on any updates made to canned responses

Don't:

Pull from the open web or undocumented or unreliable sources

Allow privileged or draft materials to be accessed by individuals without a business need

Provide definitive legal advice on complex queries

Change responses or model answers without change control or notice