O2PUBLISHED

Organisational enablement

Statements for those who enable AI use across an organisation: provision, policy, support and capability building, as distinct from performing the AI work themselves.

11 statements published at v1.29

What this overlay covers

INProvisioning AI tools and access with the controls the organisation’s policy requires.

INWriting and maintaining internal usage policy that people can actually follow.

INBuilding and sustaining capability across teams, including deciding what not to enable.

INRunning support and escalation paths for AI-related failures.

INReporting adoption, incidents and cost to the people accountable for them.

OUTPerforming the domain work. An enabler who also builds solutions holds the relevant D5 statements separately.

OUTProcurement and vendor contracting as commercial disciplines, except where the competence concerns AI-specific risk.

OUTBoard-level governance, which sits at D7 L4 rather than in an overlay.

How it combines with core statements

An enablement credential draws core statements at the level the organisation needs, most often D7 governance and D2 data statements, plus O2 statements covering the obligations of enabling others to work with AI. The overlay presumes the holder does not perform the work they enable.

Assembly shape

Core	Domain statements at the level the practitioner must hold themselves
Overlay	O2 statements covering the obligations of this function

An overlay adds statements. It never modifies or replaces a core statement.

Statements by level

Every identifier is a permanent address. Indicators are normative; they state what would be observed in a person who meets the statement.

L2 Applied

3 statements

O2.L2.01Practice

Apply the organisation’s AI policy in day-to-day enablement work.

Indicators

Applies the policy as written rather than as remembered

Directs colleagues to sanctioned tools and routes

Refers cases policy does not cover

O2.L2.02Skill

Record and route requests for AI tools, access and support.

Indicators

Records the need behind the request, not only the tool asked for

Routes to the owner accountable for the decision

Closes the loop with the requester

O2.L2.03Practice

Support colleagues in using sanctioned AI systems for their own work.

Indicators

Establishes the task before recommending a tool

Explains limits alongside capability

Reports recurring needs the current provision does not meet

L3 Proficient

5 statements

O2.L3.01Judgement

Assess organisational readiness for a proposed AI deployment.

Indicators

Assesses competence, process and support, not only technology

States the specific gap rather than a readiness score

Recommends against proceeding where readiness is absent

O2.L3.02Skill

Design a competence development plan mapped to framework statements.

Indicators

Maps roles to statements and levels rather than to courses

Establishes the current position by evidence

States how progress will be verified

O2.L3.03Skill

Design the support model for AI use, including escalation.

Indicators

States who answers what, and within what time

Provides a route for a question nobody owns

Captures recurring questions as a change to provision

O2.L3.04Judgement

Diagnose why a sanctioned tool is not being adopted.

Indicators

Establishes what the alternative provides that the sanctioned tool does not

Distinguishes a capability gap from a trust or process gap

Recommends provision alongside enforcement

O2.L3.05Judgement

Measure the effect of AI adoption on the work, not on tool usage.

Indicators

Selects measures that reflect outcomes rather than activity

States what the measure cannot show

Reports an adverse effect as readily as a favourable one

L4 Advanced

3 statements

O2.L4.01Practice

Establish the organisation’s AI capability strategy against defined competence.

Indicators

States the competence the organisation must hold, by role and level

Sequences investment against the statements that matter most

Reviews against evidence rather than against plan

O2.L4.02Judgement

Define the provision that makes policy followable.

Indicators

Provides a sanctioned route for every need policy prohibits meeting otherwise

Removes provision that is no longer used or safe

Treats unsanctioned use as a signal about provision

O2.L4.03Practice

Account to the governing body for AI capability and its gaps.

Indicators

Reports capability held against capability required

States the consequence of the gap in operational terms

Does not present activity as capability

Relationship to domains

D7	Governance statements define the policy environment the enabler operates within and often maintains.
D2	Provisioning decisions determine what data may enter which system; D2 statements apply directly.
O1	Capability building overlaps with instruction where enablement is delivered as internal training.

All three

Overlays

Eight areas

Domains

Filtered view

Statements in O2

This page displays version 1.29 · release record: /framework/v1.29