Keep accountability with a person who can answer for it.
Who decides, who reviews, and who is accountable?
Draft pathway. This content was written for the site and is awaiting content-owner review. The learning material in Learn with AI and Build Responsible AI has already been reviewed; this pathway has not.
Public-sector governance has a requirement the others do not: a named person must be able to account for a published statement — why it was made, on what basis, and how it is corrected.
- Accountability is personal and nameable
'The system generated it' is not an answer a resident or an auditor will accept.
- Corrections are public too
Plan how a wrong public statement is corrected, and how people who saw it are reached.
- Keep the record
Retain the source and the approval so the statement can be reconstructed later.
An update with incorrect weekend opening times is published. Residents arrive at a closed facility. The correction takes two days because nobody is sure who may issue one or where the original was posted.
Amina and every example here are prepared learning material, not a real case or an AI-generated result.
My governance outline
- Name the accountable person
For each category of public information, name who is accountable and who deputizes.
- Verify against confirmed source
Require operational facts — times, eligibility, availability — to be checked against the confirmed record before publication.
- Build the correction path
Decide who may issue a correction without further approval, through which channels, and how fast.
- Retain source and approval
Keep the source and approval record with each published statement.
Two days to correct opening times.
The error is noticed quickly. The correction takes two days.
What is the governance failure?
Every option has an explanation. Open as many as you like — nothing is recorded or scored.
Next: Guide people through the change
How do we bring people with us?