AI oversight is a board responsibility.
Not a technology project delegated downwards. The EU AI Act creates obligations across the organisations and service providers that fund boards oversee. The first challenge is knowing where AI is actually being used, and who owns the resulting obligations.
Most fund boards look for AI in the wrong place.
A Luxembourg fund may have no employees and no systems of its own. The AI is at the delegates: the AIFM, the central administrator, the transfer agent, the AML screening vendor. It arrives as a feature of an existing service rather than as a new one, which is why it rarely reaches the board.
In my experience AI appears in board packs as an innovation topic, and almost never in the section where the board reviews its service providers.
What AI is embedded in the services you deliver to us, and how are the AI Act obligations allocated between us?
Deployment has outrun oversight.
Seven commitments set out in AI in the Boardroom, the ILA guidance I co-authored with the Research Think Tank.
To govern AI, boards must elevate.
What the board should require, in what order. Visibility before controls, controls before scale.
The first ninety days.
Published and presented.
Co-author of the ILA’s board guidance on AI, and a regular speaker on AI governance and EU AI Act readiness across Luxembourg and Brussels.
Looking for an independent perspective?
For board appointments, governance advisory or speaking enquiries, I would be pleased to hear from you.
KATIA@KATIACIESIELSKA.COM →