Flagship engagement
Culture & Governance Risk Diagnostic
An independent, evidence led assessment of how organisational culture, governance arrangements and everyday behaviour strengthen delivery, or create risks that conventional reporting may not reveal.
It connects what an organisation formally says, what its leaders believe and what its people experience.
Governance can appear sound while risk is accumulating underneath it.
Boards receive policies, dashboards, risk registers, assurance reports and executive updates. These sources are essential, but they do not always reveal how governance operates in practice.
A formal process may exist while implementation varies. Leaders may believe challenge is welcomed while people experience it differently. An issue may be visible within one team but remain absent from board reporting.
The diagnostic examines these gaps and determines what they mean for organisational risk, accountability and delivery.
What the organisation has formally established should happen, including responsibilities, processes, values, risk ownership, escalation routes and assurance mechanisms.
What those responsible for governance and leadership believe is happening, including the confidence they place in existing controls, reporting and organisational behaviour.
How decisions, challenge, accountability, management, escalation and learning are experienced across the organisation.
The risk often sits between them.
The methodology
From organisational evidence to governance action
The diagnostic combines multiple forms of evidence, tests differences between organisational perspectives, assesses substantiated risks and translates the findings into practical board and executive action.
Select a stage, evidence perspective or analytical lens to explore the methodology.
The Culture & Governance Diagnostic Architecture
Select any element to open its detail.
Analytical core, within Assess
These dimensions are combined through a proprietary analytical model used within commissioned diagnostic engagements.
Output rail
This page provides a high level overview of the methodology. The underlying diagnostic instruments, analytical framework, scoring model and implementation materials are proprietary to Sami Gichki Consulting and are provided only within a commissioned engagement.
The engagement
A proportionate process shaped around the organisation
The precise scope reflects the organisation's size, complexity, operating environment and current pressures, with clear arrangements for confidentiality, accessibility, safeguarding and sensitive evidence.
- Initial exploratory meeting.
- Agreed diagnostic questions.
- Organisational boundaries.
- Participation and evidence plan.
- Confidentiality and safeguarding arrangements.
- Targeted review of approximately 15 to 20 core documents.
- Confidential organisational diagnostic survey.
- Board and leadership comparator evidence.
- Up to 10 confidential interviews.
- Up to two facilitated diagnostic focus groups.
- Documentary, quantitative and qualitative triangulation.
- Perception difference analysis.
- Proprietary multidimensional risk assessment.
- Culture and governance risk mapping.
- Board level findings report.
- Board and executive presentation.
- Prioritised recommendations.
- Facilitated solution lab.
- Agreed ownership.
- Proposed Key Cultural Risk Indicators.
- Structured three month progress review.
- Structured six month progress review.
- Review of implementation, ownership and emerging evidence.
The number of documents, interviews, discussions and participants may be adjusted according to organisational context and agreed scope.
What the organisation receives
Findings designed to be used
Every diagnostic provides a clear line from evidence to finding, risk, recommendation, ownership and oversight.
A clear account of the evidence considered, principal findings, organisational strengths, emerging or material risks and relevant analytical limitations.
A board level representation of the principal cultural and governance risks, their organisational relationships and their relative priority.
An analysis of alignment and significant differences between formal governance, leadership understanding and organisational experience.
A focused set of recommendations designed to support practical governance, leadership and organisational decisions.
A tailored set of relevant early warning indicators selected for the organisation.
A facilitated presentation and solution focused discussion covering findings, challenge, ownership, priorities and implementation.
Why it is different
More than a culture survey
The purpose is to determine what organisational experience means for governance, risk and delivery.
- Measure workforce sentiment at a particular point in time.
- Focus primarily on employee perception.
- Present organisation wide averages.
- Identify symptoms without fully examining their relationship to governance.
- Produce broad engagement recommendations.
- Combines formal, quantitative and qualitative evidence.
- Compares perspectives across organisational levels.
- Tests alignment between formal intent and operational experience.
- Examines the strength of emerging findings.
- Assesses risks through multiple analytical dimensions.
- Maps relationships between risk themes.
- Translates findings into board level action and oversight.
- Independent
- An external perspective delivered constructively and without a predetermined conclusion.
- Evidence led
- Findings are based on structured evidence, comparison and triangulation rather than unsupported impressions.
- Non extractive
- Participants contribute to organisational understanding and improvement rather than being treated solely as data sources.
- Systemic
- The analysis examines relationships between governance, leadership, behaviour, process and organisational context.
- Proportionate
- The scope reflects the organisation's size, complexity, resources and risk environment.
- Actionable
- Evidence is translated into priorities, ownership, assurance questions and observable indicators.
Culture & Governance Risk Diagnostic methodology and materials © 2026 Sami Gichki Consulting. All rights reserved.
Timing
Approximately 10 to 14 weeks
Timing depends on access to documents, participant availability and organisational feedback. Three month and six month progress reviews follow delivery of the final report and are included within the engagement.
Investment is determined following an exploratory conversation and reflects the organisation's size, complexity, participation requirements and agreed scope.
Proposed next step
Begin with the question the organisation needs to answer.
The initial meeting brings together the relevant governance and executive leaders to clarify the organisational context, principal questions, participation requirements, confidentiality arrangements and whether the diagnostic is the appropriate response.
Scope, methods, timing and investment are agreed before work begins.