The kn0w Audit is independent by design — no advisory, no implementation arm, no follow-on services — and benchmarked against your peer cohort under the same methodology each year. One fixed-scope engagement, four weeks end to end, issued as a signed Statement under the kn0w hallmark. This page is the mechanical sequence: contract execution to the Statement in your hand, and what continues each year after that.
The Audit measures AI accountability posture across six dimensions: Workflow Automation Rate, AI Tool Deployment, AI Literacy Level, Governance and Oversight, AI Investment Spend, and Outcome Tracking. The CEO and every function head are measured across the same six dimensions on the same terms — the difference is depth, not the questions. Each dimension is measured through two channels.
The CEO completes a two-stage company intake before the engagement begins; each function head then completes a structured questionnaire before their voice session.
Seven sessions follow the written intake — Session 0 with the CEO, Sessions 1 through 6 with the heads of Technology, Compliance & Risk, Operations, Finance, Growth & Revenue, and Customer Success.
The Audit is commissioned by signing a contract with KN0W PTE. LTD., the Singapore data controller.
Execution triggers the Data Contribution Agreement, signed once per engagement, naming KN0W PTE. LTD. as data controller and kn0w LLC, the Wyoming entity, as technical sub-processor. No data flows until the agreement is executed.
Once executed, the CEO completes the two-stage company intake — company facts, headcount, regulatory scope, and the factual questions at company-wide level.
Voice sessions are then scheduled: Session 0 first, Sessions 1 through 6 to follow. Sessions 1 through 6 cannot be scheduled until Session 0 is complete; the constraint is enforced at the infrastructure layer, not by convention. The CEO Visibility Gap — the signed delta between CEO perception and function-head reported practice — depends on it.
The engagement runs across four weeks in four stages.
The CEO’s two-stage company intake completes at company-wide level. Each function head completes a structured questionnaire before their voice session.
Session 0 with the CEO captures CEO perception across all six dimensions and takes around thirty minutes; the fifteen-minute company intake sits inside the same four-week engagement, not on top of it. Sessions 1 through 6 run around an hour each, capturing actual practice across the six dimensions plus the regulatory metadata routed to the frameworks the company answers to. The CEO and every function head answer the same measured questions across the same six dimensions — the function heads in far more depth. That parallel is deliberate: it is what makes the two views comparable on the same terms, and it is how the CEO Visibility Gap is computed.
The deterministic scoring engine runs once the written intake and all seven sessions are complete. A reading is calculated for each of the six dimensions, and the CEO Visibility Gap is taken per dimension as the signed delta between the CEO’s reading and the function heads’ — over-estimated where positive, under-estimated where negative. The Gap is this set of per-dimension deltas, not a single combined score. Cohort percentile resolves against the peer dataset at a k-anonymity floor of 5 — and where the cohort does not meet the floor, the artefact says so rather than reporting a partial percentile.
The Statement is drafted, reviewed under the kn0w hallmark, and issued as a PDF, stamped with the four-part identifier kn0w / NNNNNN / YYYY-MM-DD / vX.Y. No natural person signs it — the artefact is authenticated by the hallmark, the timestamp, and the identifier.
What makes a Statement defensible is not the reading — it is how the reading was reached. Five constraints hold across every engagement, regardless of who commissions it.
Issuance produces one artefact: a PDF issued under the kn0w hallmark, structured so it can be submitted without translation to the people who ask for it.
A band and a per-dimension reading
The CEO Visibility Gap
The regulatory mapping routed to the frameworks the company answers to
The priority actions for the next twelve months
Every regulatory citation carries its verification status
Every obligation carries its in-force status
Precise readings issued in the Statement.
The engagement ends in one document — a Statement issued under the methodology, built to be handed over rather than explained.
Every issued artefact is stamped with the four-part identifier under the kn0w hallmark.
The founding act of issuance is the Audit. It confers standing — the institutional status that says your AI accountability posture is on the record, independently issued and current, for anyone who asks. Standing is held for twelve months from issuance and confirmed annually by the Annual Statement at the institutional anniversary.
Written-intake only — no voice. They produce a snapshot of indicative dimension movement against the operative artefact baseline; they never amend or supersede it.
A full re-engagement — refreshed written intake plus seven voice sessions across the CEO and the six function heads, issued under the same hallmark, identifier structure, and methodology as the founding Statement. It produces fresh absolute readings and supersedes the prior operative artefact.
The prior artefact is retained perpetually as the historical record of the founding act; the Annual Statement is what the board, the regulator, and the diligence data room reference from that point on.
Material change outside the calendar cadence — acquisition, a new regulated business line, significant function-head turnover — can be reflected through a member-commissioned re-Audit, issued at the standalone Audit price, on the same identifier sequence, without displacing the anniversary on which the next Annual Statement issues. It produces a fresh Statement on the same terms as the founding act.
The Audit is commissioned in writing, delivered by software, scored deterministically, and issued under the kn0w hallmark. Every artefact kn0w issues is point-in-time — the Issuer’s view at the date of issue. The founding Statement is the founding act. Standing is what the relationship maintains.