marketing.docsPage.nav.governanceAims

Governance & AIMS

In ActLoom, Governance is not presented as a static ISO 42001 checklist. It is a working console that lets the team operate an AI management system over time: track control coverage, manage mandatory documents, schedule audits, review decisions, record non-conformities, follow interested parties, and watch progress through objectives and gaps.

This documentation page follows the structure of the actual Governance screen in the application so a user can recognize what they see in the product and understand what each tab is for.

What the governance workspace is designed to do

Turn ISO 42001 into active operations

The workspace breaks governance into modules a team can actually maintain instead of expecting one person to manage a full AIMS in spreadsheets.

Show programme health at a glance

Alignment percentage, completion signals, SoA progress, document coverage, and open gaps create one place to judge maturity.

Connect planning to evidence

Objectives, reviews, audits, non-conformities, and documents all live in related modules rather than in disconnected policies and folders.

Operational aspect	What to know in ActLoom
Prerequisites	Governance becomes useful once the company has selected frameworks, has some existing controls or documents, and wants a managed programme rather than isolated assessments.
Main inputs	Control applicability, policy and document records, audit schedules, review records, NCs, objectives, and party expectations.
Main outputs	AIMS maturity signals, SoA coverage, governance evidence, audit and review records, and structured governance gaps.
Who typically uses it	Governance leads, quality managers, compliance leads, executives, and internal audit stakeholders.
Plan access	Governance and AIMS workflows are positioned for Business and Pro plans where ISO 42001-style programme management is enabled.
Relevant routes	/api/compliance/aims/summary, /api/compliance/aims/soa, /api/compliance/aims/documents, /api/compliance/aims/audits, /api/compliance/aims/reviews, /api/compliance/aims/non-conformities

1. The Governance Workspace In The Application

The real Governance page is organized around an alignment header and a tabbed workspace. Instead of giving users one long form, the application separates the programme into modules: controls, documents, audits, reviews, non-conformities, interested parties, objectives, and gaps.

ISO 42001 Alignment

68%

SoA: 29/38Mandatory docs: 7/1112 gaps remaining

Controls

Documents

Audits

Reviews

Parties

Objectives

Gaps12

Controls tab

A.2 Policies for AI

8/10 implemented

A.3 Internal organisation

5/7 implemented

A.6 AI lifecycle

10/14 implemented

A.10 Third parties

6/7 implemented

Tab completion

Documents

Complete

Audits

Complete

Reviews

In progress

Objectives

Needs update

Gaps panel

2 missing audit follow-ups

3 SoA entries still partial

4 overdue objectives reviews

Fig 33a. Governance workspace — alignment score, AIMS tab navigation, and module-level completion signals as shown in the application.

What the user sees first on the page

UI element in the app	What it tells the user	Why it matters
Alignment percentage	High-level ISO 42001 programme maturity	Gives leadership and operators one quick signal of how complete the AIMS is
SoA progress	How many applicable controls are implemented	Makes the controls tab measurable instead of abstract
Document coverage	How many mandatory document areas are covered	Helps users see if they have governance evidence or only intentions
Tab completion indicators	Which governance modules are materially in place	Turns the governance page into a progress map, not just a navigation menu
Gaps badge	Number of remaining governance gaps	Pulls attention toward what is still missing rather than what already exists

This page mirrors the product structure

The purpose of this docs page is to help the user understand the Governance screen they actually use in the dashboard, not just explain ISO 42001 in isolation.

2. How The Governance Tabs Work Together

Each tab corresponds to a different part of operating the AIMS. The value of the page comes from the fact that these tabs are related: controls create expectations, documents provide evidence, audits test the system, reviews make management decisions, non-conformities force corrective action, and gaps show what is still missing.

Typical governance loop inside the product

Define

Use Controls and Documents to define what the governance system should contain and prove.

Check

Use Audits and Reviews to test whether the programme is working and whether leadership has enough visibility.

Correct

Use Non-Conformities and Objectives to turn findings into owned remediation and measurable improvement.

Prioritize

Use the Gaps view to see which modules still need action and return to the relevant tab directly.

Tab in the application	What the user manages there
Controls	Statement of Applicability entries and control implementation status across ISO 42001 domains
Documents	Mandatory AIMS documents, uploaded evidence, links, versions, owners, and approval states
Audits	Internal audit programme, scope, lead auditor, status, findings, and follow-up cadence
Reviews	Management review meetings, chairs, reminders, completion, signatures, and actions
NC	Non-conformities, root cause, source, owner, due date, and lifecycle status
Parties	Interested parties, their expectations, influence level, communication level, and related AI systems
Objectives	Programme objectives, KPIs, owners, due dates, statuses, and periodic review logs
Gaps	Cross-tab view of outstanding ISO governance gaps with effort and priority indicators

3. Controls Tab: Statement Of Applicability In Practice

In the application, the Controls tab is the operational home of the SoA. It is where a company sees which Annex A controls are applicable, how mature they are, and where tasks or evidence still need to be attached. This is much closer to how the product feels than describing the SoA as only a PDF export.

Governance & AIMS Overview

Internal Audits

2 upcoming

Non-Conformities

1 open

Mgmt. Reviews

Next: Jun

SOA Entries

38 applicable

Upcoming Internal Audits

Q2 AI Systems Audit

May 15, 2026 · Clara Sanz

Scheduled

Incident Process Review

Apr 28, 2026 · Bob Chen

In Progress

Fig 33. Governance dashboard — AIMS/ISO 42001 overview with internal audits, non-conformities, and management reviews.

Control states used in the product

State	Meaning inside the workspace
APPLICABLE_IMPLEMENTED	The control applies and is already in place with supporting evidence
APPLICABLE_PARTIAL	The control applies but implementation remains incomplete
APPLICABLE_PLANNED	The control applies and is planned, but not yet operational
NOT_APPLICABLE	The control does not apply and requires a documented justification

Why users spend time here

To understand which ISO 42001 control domains are still weak.
To attach implementation evidence and make the control state auditable.
To assign follow-up work when a control is only partial or planned.
To feed the alignment score and gap engine used elsewhere on the governance page.

The Controls tab is the live SoA

In ActLoom, the SoA is not only a certification artifact. It is the working control register that drives completion, evidence, and remediation inside the Governance module.

4. Operational Governance Tabs

The rest of the Governance page is built around operational managers, each with its own creation flow, editing workflow, owners, and completion signal. This is where the application feels like a management system rather than a document library.

Documents

The Documents tab manages governance evidence directly in the application: document type, owner, framework link, approval, versioning, upload mode, and coverage of mandatory document categories.

What the Documents tab helps the user do

Create or upload mandatory AIMS documents without leaving the governance workspace.
Track owners, approvers, versions, and coverage of required document families.
Use one structured store instead of passing policies through email and shared folders.

Audits

The Audits tab is a manager, not a note field. Users can create internal audits with title, schedule, scope, frameworks, lead auditor, status transitions, and findings-linked workflow.

Audit field in the app	Operational use
Title and scheduled date	Create an auditable calendar rather than a vague audit intention
Audit scope	Specify what systems, controls, or domains the audit actually covers
Lead auditor	Create visible ownership of the audit record
Status transitions	Track planned, in progress, on hold, completed, and reopened audits
Findings count	Expose how much unresolved work the audit has generated

Reviews

Management reviews in the application have their own lifecycle: title, review date, chair, reminder recipient, frameworks, completion, and signature. This makes the tab much closer to a true management workflow than a simple meeting log.

Non-Conformities

The NC register acts as the corrective-action engine of the governance page. Each NC has a source, description, root cause, owner, due date, and lifecycle status, which makes it central to turning governance findings into tracked action.

Interested Parties

The Parties tab reflects a real management concern in the app: who expects what from the AI programme. It records party type, expectations, influence level, communication level, contact information, and related AI systems.

Objectives

Objectives are treated as live programme commitments with KPI, target, owner, due date, review frequency, and review log. That makes this tab useful for actual governance follow-up rather than for static annual goal-setting.

Why Objectives matter in this workspace

They create measurable programme targets instead of vague improvement promises.
They connect governance work to owners and review frequencies.
They feed the completion logic used by the Governance page summary.

5. Gaps Tab: The Cross-Module Prioritization View

The Gaps tab is one of the most product-specific parts of the Governance module. Instead of asking the user to inspect each tab manually, the application surfaces remaining ISO 42001 governance gaps with priority, effort estimate, and a direct link back to the relevant module.

What appears in the Gaps view

Signal	What it helps the user decide
Gap count	How much governance work remains overall
High-priority gaps	Which issues need action before lower-value polish
Estimated effort	Whether a gap is a quick fix or a more structural governance task
Module grouping	Which tab to open next to resolve the issue
Recommended action	What concrete next move is expected from the team

Why this feels different from generic governance tools

The application does not leave the user alone with a static standard. It calculates module-specific gaps and lets the user jump back to the exact area of the workspace that should be improved next.

6. How Teams Typically Use Governance In ActLoom

In practice, teams do not use every tab equally every day. A healthier pattern is to use the summary header and gaps view as orientation, then work inside the specific module that needs attention.

Recommended operating rhythm

Review the alignment banner and gaps count regularly to see whether the governance programme is improving or stagnating.
Use Controls and Documents to build the backbone of the AIMS before expecting audits and reviews to look credible.
Use Audits and Reviews to challenge the system, not just to confirm that records exist.
Use NC and Objectives as the bridge between findings and measurable improvement.
Keep Interested Parties current so governance decisions remain tied to stakeholder expectations and actual AI systems.

This is how Governance behaves in the app

The Governance page in ActLoom is a modular operating console. Its real value comes from how the tabs reinforce each other and how the summary and gaps logic help the user decide where to work next.

Related Sections

Compliance Assessment

Use this when governance work starts from scores, gaps, and remediation needing formal follow-through.

Team

Go here when governance controls need clearer ownership, reviewer separation, or access discipline.

Documents

Read this when audits, reviews, and non-conformities need controlled outputs or evidence packages.

Artifacts

Use this to see which governance-controlled outputs need periodic review, approval, or refresh.

Ready to get started?

Join hundreds of companies using ActLoom to simplify AI Act compliance. Start your free assessment today — no credit card required.

Start Free Assessment View Pricing

Questions? Contact us at support@actloom.com

Operational aspect

What to know in ActLoom

Prerequisites

Governance becomes useful once the company has selected frameworks, has some existing controls or documents, and wants a managed programme rather than isolated assessments.

Main inputs

Control applicability, policy and document records, audit schedules, review records, NCs, objectives, and party expectations.

Main outputs

AIMS maturity signals, SoA coverage, governance evidence, audit and review records, and structured governance gaps.

Who typically uses it

Governance leads, quality managers, compliance leads, executives, and internal audit stakeholders.

Plan access

Governance and AIMS workflows are positioned for Business and Pro plans where ISO 42001-style programme management is enabled.

Relevant routes

/api/compliance/aims/summary, /api/compliance/aims/soa, /api/compliance/aims/documents, /api/compliance/aims/audits, /api/compliance/aims/reviews, /api/compliance/aims/non-conformities

UI element in the app

What it tells the user

Why it matters

Alignment percentage

High-level ISO 42001 programme maturity

Gives leadership and operators one quick signal of how complete the AIMS is

SoA progress

How many applicable controls are implemented

Makes the controls tab measurable instead of abstract

Document coverage

How many mandatory document areas are covered

Helps users see if they have governance evidence or only intentions

Tab completion indicators

Which governance modules are materially in place

Turns the governance page into a progress map, not just a navigation menu

Gaps badge

Number of remaining governance gaps

Pulls attention toward what is still missing rather than what already exists

Tab in the application

What the user manages there

Controls

Statement of Applicability entries and control implementation status across ISO 42001 domains

Documents

Mandatory AIMS documents, uploaded evidence, links, versions, owners, and approval states

Audits

Internal audit programme, scope, lead auditor, status, findings, and follow-up cadence

Reviews

Management review meetings, chairs, reminders, completion, signatures, and actions

Non-conformities, root cause, source, owner, due date, and lifecycle status

Parties

Interested parties, their expectations, influence level, communication level, and related AI systems

Objectives

Programme objectives, KPIs, owners, due dates, statuses, and periodic review logs

Gaps

Cross-tab view of outstanding ISO governance gaps with effort and priority indicators

State

Meaning inside the workspace

APPLICABLE_IMPLEMENTED

The control applies and is already in place with supporting evidence

APPLICABLE_PARTIAL

The control applies but implementation remains incomplete

APPLICABLE_PLANNED

The control applies and is planned, but not yet operational

NOT_APPLICABLE

The control does not apply and requires a documented justification

Audit field in the app

Operational use

Title and scheduled date

Create an auditable calendar rather than a vague audit intention

Audit scope

Specify what systems, controls, or domains the audit actually covers

Lead auditor

Create visible ownership of the audit record

Status transitions

Track planned, in progress, on hold, completed, and reopened audits

Findings count

Expose how much unresolved work the audit has generated

Signal

What it helps the user decide

Gap count

How much governance work remains overall

High-priority gaps

Which issues need action before lower-value polish

Estimated effort

Whether a gap is a quick fix or a more structural governance task

Module grouping

Which tab to open next to resolve the issue

Recommended action

What concrete next move is expected from the team