§3.4 · FOUNDATIONS · 4 MIN READ · EDITION 1.0
Documenting the decision, not just the output
A quality record should capture what a human decided and why, with the AI output as supporting evidence — not the AI output alone, presented as if it were the decision.
A finding, a draft risk analysis, or a flagged anomaly is an input to a decision. The record that survives an audit should show the reviewer's acceptance, rejection or escalation, not just the machine's suggestion.
This distinction protects the organisation as much as it protects the reviewer: a decision record with a name and a rationale is defensible; an unattributed AI output is not.
PUT THIS INTO PRACTICE
- 01Record the reviewer's decision alongside the AI output, not instead of it.
- 02Capture the rationale when a finding is rejected, not only when it is accepted.
- 03Treat an undocumented decision as an open gap, not a minor omission.
RELATED INSTRUMENTS
CITE THIS SECTION
§3.4 · Edition 1.0 · Documenting the decision, not just the output