Board Case Study · Manufacturing (B2B) · Public & Private versions
The board approved the AI platform. No one read the footnote on page 11, the one naming the restricted frontier model the whole product quietly runs on. Then access to that model changes.
The situation
Aldren Industrial, a mid-size B2B manufacturer, deployed an AI customer-operations platform called Apex. The governance tension lives in a single footnote on page 11 of the vendor proposal: Apex runs on a restricted-access frontier model reached through a limited-access program. The board approved the product without understanding the model dependency underneath it.
The case runs along three threads, whether the board pressed on the ROI case before approving; what model actually sits beneath the product and what that dependency means; and what must be disclosed, to whom, if access to the model changes. It diverges into two paths, approval leading to an access restructure and disclosure exposure, or a request for review under management resistance, before converging on a D&O renewal questionnaire that formalizes what defensible AI governance now requires.
It is built in two board versions. The public-company board confronts exposure through the earnings call, the 10-K, securities analysts, and material-misstatement risk. The private, PE-backed board confronts the same failure through an LP investor update, the EBITDA bridge, the exit timeline, and buyer diligence.
“The board approved the platform. The dependency was a footnote no one read, until access to the model changed. What must be said, to whom, and when?”
The Footnote on Page 11 · Board scenario
The decision on the table
The full case, scenario architecture, board materials, and facilitation notes, is shared with boards and partners on request.