Governance failure
Governance failure is rarely a failure of framework — it is a failure of judgment under conditions the framework never anticipated.
Most boards have no record of how they perform when information is incomplete, time is short, and consequences are immediate. Weaknesses in process, information flow, and decision authority surface only when the cost of discovering them is highest.
The proposition
Judgment is a capability. It can be rehearsed.
A board that has worked through consequential decisions under realistic pressure, with incomplete information and structured debrief, is not the same board that has not.
Method
1. Scenario architecture
A scenario is constructed around your institution's mandate, decision-making structure, and the categories of risk most likely to demand board-level action. It is calibrated to be realistic, not comfortable.
2. Decision rounds
Your board or committee works through the scenario in structured rounds. Each round presents new information and requires a decision. The pressure is deliberate. The environment is controlled.
3. Consequence modelling
Decisions are played forward. Participants see the downstream effects of each choice on regulatory standing, institutional liability, and internal authority. This is where judgment is tested.
4. Governance debrief
The rehearsal concludes with a structured debrief: what the process revealed about information flow, decision authority, and where the governance structure held or did not.
Sector focus
Governance Rehearsal works with financial services institutions — banks, asset managers, and regulated firms whose boards carry direct regulatory accountability.
Scenarios in this sector address regulatory intervention, AI deployment oversight, systemic risk escalation, and executive accountability under the Senior Managers and Certification Regime.
Access
Governance Rehearsal operates as a closed practice. Engagements are limited, bespoke, and initiated by direct conversation.
Direct enquiries to contact@governancerehearsal.com.