Right now, somewhere in your business, AI is making calls you'd answer for — a credit decision, a triage flag, a price. You have a view on how it's run. You've just never seen it placed against anyone else's.
You know your numbers. You know your team. This is the first read on whether you know your AI.
Six questions. Four minutes. One email.
In four minutes you'll see where your AI accountability actually places — across six dimensions, against the regime you answer to, and against every other CEO who's taken the same four minutes. Most have never seen their own position stated plainly. Some of them should.
Where AI is actually being used — not where you think it is. Who signed off on it, and whether that's on record. Whether your people can handle AI safely. Who owns oversight, and what that oversight really amounts to. What you've committed to AI spend against what's been spent. Whether anyone tracks outcomes past launch.
You answer for your company. Four minutes, one email, no contract, no sessions. It's the self-reported half of the kn0w Audit, opened to you before you commission one.
Your six dimensions, each placed in a maturity band — Minimal, Early-stage, Systematic, or Embedded. Your regulatory exposure, named: the accountability regime that applies to you — APRA FAR, CPS 230, FCA SM&CR, Consumer Duty, TGA, MHRA — and the personal liability that rides with it. And your position against the pool: where you land against every 50–500-staff FinTech and HealthTech company that has answered before you. Global, indicative, and honest about being both.
Where your self-reported posture meets the standard, named. Where it leaves you exposed, flagged. Clear enough to read in one sitting — confronting enough that most don't stop at the first dimension.
What it can't tell you is whether your team would place you where you placed yourself. That question is what the Audit is for.
This reading tells you what you believe about your AI accountability, placed against your peers. That's genuinely useful — most CEOs have never had even that stated plainly.
But a reading is not a Statement. A reading is what you hand to yourself. A Statement is what you hand to a regulator, a board, or a diligence room when they ask — signed, independent, issued under the kn0w hallmark, and reliable precisely because you didn't write it. The difference isn't cosmetic. It's the difference between a belief and an instrument. This reading is indicative and unsigned by design: it's your private baseline.
Open to any FinTech or HealthTech company, 50–500 staff. Where the kn0w Audit isn't yet issued in your jurisdiction, your reading will say so — and you'll be first to know when it opens.
The kn0w Audit puts the same six dimensions to your function heads, independently — and the distance between what you'd answer and what they'd answer is where your personal accountability actually sits.
No one can self-report their own blind spot. That distance only exists once your team answers on the same terms — and issuing it is what the Audit is for.
This is what you believe. The Statement measures whether your team agrees.
The regulators have moved: the test is no longer whether your AI works, but whether you can show — in writing, in advance — that you took reasonable steps. Across the frameworks that apply to you, the named person on the hook usually isn't the team. It's you.
Four minutes tells you where you stand. One email delivers it.