An illustrative workflow

A policy review.
A clearer way through.

A fictional team needs to review a policy after a defined change. Follow how Aprentiz’s operating model connects the question, evidence, responsible person and next action.

Explore the four steps

Follow the process

Four steps.
One connected record.

Explore what each stage contributes to the review, from its initial scope to an action and retest. This example uses a fictional scenario.

A POLICY REVIEW, STEP BY STEPIllustrative workflow
01 / Define

Start with a question worth answering.

A team needs to review a policy after a change. First, name the sources, business scope, decision owner and evidence the review will need.

What this creates

A defined review, with a clear owner and boundaries.

REVIEW BRIEF

Policy change review

Question
What needs to change?
Inputs
Defined change + policy
Owner
Responsible professional
Acceptance
Agreed evidence and tests

The scope is explicit before analysis begins.

02 / Inspect

See the support. Keep the gaps visible.

Compare the admitted sources and policy. Separate what the evidence supports from what is missing or still needs professional interpretation.

What this creates

A source-linked evidence map, including unresolved questions.

EVIDENCE MAP

Three different states.

Evidence found

The relevant policy passage is located.

Evidence needed

The record of the control test is missing.

Needs judgement

Application to the defined scope needs review.

A missing record cannot become positive assurance.

03 / Decide

Give judgement a named owner.

The responsible person inspects the evidence and records a decision, a hold or a request for more information. AI-assisted analysis informs that judgement.

What this creates

An attributable decision, its rationale and its limitations.

HUMAN DECISION

The next step belongs to you.

Example dispositionHold for further evidence

Request the missing test record before deciding whether to change the policy.

Recorded with
Owner + rationale + source basis
Next step
Assigned evidence request
04 / Retest

Follow the decision into the work.

Assign the next action, test the proposed change against the agreed criteria and retain the result. Reopen the question when new evidence changes its basis.

What this creates

An action and retest history that can be reviewed later.

ACTION & RETEST

Keep the history connected.

  1. Assign the actionName the owner and required evidence.
  2. Test the changeUse the original acceptance criteria.
  3. Record the outcomeClose, reopen or retain the hold.

The earlier decision remains part of the record.

An illustration of the operating model, using a fictional scenario. No live analysis or professional determination is performed.

Discuss your own workflow How the Proving Ground develops it