Flagship engagement
Risk Intelligence
An independent assessment of where culture, governance and organisational behaviour create risks that conventional reporting may not reveal.
It connects what an organisation formally says should happen, what its leaders believe is happening and what its people actually 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.
Risk Intelligence examines these gaps, tests whether emerging findings are supported by evidence 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 in the gap between them. Risk Intelligence is designed to find it.
The methodology
From organisational evidence to governance action
Risk Intelligence 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 Risk Intelligence Architecture
Select any element to open its detail.
Analytical core, within Assess
These dimensions are combined through the proprietary Risk Intelligence analytical model used within commissioned engagements.
Output rail
The underlying assessment instruments, analytical framework, scoring model and implementation materials that comprise Risk Intelligence are proprietary to Sami Gichki Consulting and are provided only within commissioned engagements.
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 assessment questions.
- Organisational boundaries.
- Participation and evidence plan.
- Confidentiality and safeguarding arrangements.
- Targeted review of approximately 15 to 20 core documents.
- Confidential organisational survey.
- Board and leadership comparator evidence.
- Up to 10 confidential interviews.
- Up to two facilitated diagnostic focus groups.
- Documentary, quantitative and qualitative triangulation.
- Perspective difference analysis.
- Proprietary multidimensional risk assessment.
- Risk Intelligence 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 engagement provides a clear line from evidence to action.
- Evidence
- Finding
- Risk
- Recommendation
- Ownership
- 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.
- Tests whether identified risks are already visible through existing governance and assurance mechanisms.
- 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.
Now inviting participants
Founding Risk Intelligence Pilot
We are currently inviting a small number of organisations to participate in the founding Risk Intelligence pilot.
The programme will test and refine the methodology with organisations of approximately 15 to 50 employees before wider commercial rollout.
Participating organisations will receive the assessment at no professional fee, subject to agreed direct technology and delivery costs and defined participation requirements.
Eligibility
- Approximately 15 to 50 employees
- A clearly identifiable senior sponsor
- Willingness to involve staff and leadership
- Board or governance participation
- Willingness to support an anonymised or mutually approved case study
Risk Intelligence methodology and materials © 2026 Sami Gichki Ltd. All rights reserved.
Timing
Approximately 10 to 14 weeks
A full Risk Intelligence engagement typically takes approximately 10 to 14 weeks, depending on organisational size, access to evidence, participant availability and scope. The engagement includes structured three month and six month implementation reviews.
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 Risk Intelligence is the appropriate response.
Scope, methods, timing and investment are agreed before work begins.