Decision inputs
Facts that change the policy answer
For this request, assessment results and published certification rules is the input boundary and a certificate eligibility result is the output boundary. A useful check makes both explicit.
- 1Task and owner
- Certification programme owner wants to decide whether an employee receives a certificate. The policy check should identify who can approve, correct or withdraw a certificate eligibility result.
- 2Information involved
- Assessment results and published certification rules. Check uploads, history and connected systems before describing the request as low sensitivity.
- 3Tool and account
- An approved company account. Treat a new plug-in or connector as a change to the approved setup.
- 4Intended result
- The expected result is a certificate eligibility result. Record the audience and the next system in the chain, rather than describing the output only as a draft.
- 5Consequence if it is wrong
- The decision affects the employee and errors can undermine the credential. This is the fact most likely to move the request from routine handling into review.
- 6Human review
- authorised assessor should inspect, change, reject or stop the result. Make the review happen before reliance and give the reviewer a real way to stop the work.
Possible policy routes
The task name alone cannot decide it.
A published workplace policy can return different answers for the same task. These are the practical branches worth encoding.
A routine policy route may be possible
A routine route is easier to justify when the exact account is approved, only the minimum employee learning information is used, a certificate eligibility result remains within the stated purpose, and authorised assessor reviews it before use.
Approval may be required
Send the request for approval if the account or data handling is uncertain, the decision affects the employee and errors can undermine the credential, or a certificate eligibility result reaches people or systems beyond the requester’s authority.
The request may need to stop or change
The company may need a safer design when restricted information would enter an unapproved service, the output would act before authorised assessor can intervene, or apply fixed criteria, preserve evidence and provide a review path cannot be maintained. Consider less information, a controlled account or a non-AI process.
Request checklist
Questions to ask before using the tool
- 01
Will decide whether an employee receives a certificate run inside the approved company environment from start to finish?
- 02
Can any personal, sensitive, confidential or secret part of assessment results and published certification rules be removed?
- 03
Will a certificate eligibility result remain working material, reach another person or make another system act?
- 04
Does authorised assessor have enough authority and time to stop the result?
- 05
Would another region, audience or frequency activate a different company rule?
Worked request
What the employee should submit
This example supplies decision facts without pasting the underlying material into the approval record.
- requester
- certification programme owner
- task
- Use AI to decide whether an employee receives a certificate.
- information
- assessment results and published certification rules
- tool
- An approved company account
- frequency
- Recurring work
- region
- Where the work and affected people are located
- purpose
- Analyse
- impact
- Employee certification
- review
- Complete human review
- owner
- authorised assessor
Useful safeguards
Controls that fit this request
- ✓
Apply fixed criteria, preserve evidence and provide a review path
- ✓
Reduce assessment results and published certification rules to the smallest useful extract and remove fields unrelated to a certificate eligibility result.
- ✓
Keep the use within analyse and run another check if the audience, tool or intended effect changes.
- ✓
Keep the submitted facts, authorised assessor’s decision and the exact published policy version.
Questions people ask
About this AI use
Is using AI to decide whether an employee receives a certificate automatically allowed?
Treat this as a request pattern. The authoritative answer comes from the current company policy and the employee’s completed submission.
Which facts should be submitted before work begins?
Describe a certificate eligibility result, identify assessment results and published certification rules, name the exact tool and account, explain who will receive or rely on the output, and state how authorised assessor will review it.
What should remain after the decision?
Keep the submitted facts, authorised assessor’s decision and the exact published policy version. A classification and controlled reference may be enough when copying assessment results and published certification rules would create unnecessary risk.