Make more room for judgement.
Start with your team’s existing review, then automate selected checks over time while keeping human judgement and decision evidence clear.
Start with the process you have · Your systems control the action
Start with the process you already have.
A review process rarely starts from a clean system. A team works from a spreadsheet of cases, PDFs, a few system screens, a checklist and an approval by email. It works, but what must be true lives in people’s heads and the evidence is spread across all of them.
MeshQu does not ask you to replace that process. Start with one decision inside it. Make what must be true, the evidence and who decides explicit, and keep a record of how each case was assessed. Then automate what can be automated, one check at a time.
Make the decision explicit.
What exactly is being decided? Which requirements govern it? What must be true, and what evidence shows it? Who can approve, and when must a case go higher? Answering these once, with the people who own the decision, is most of the work.
Turn the material that governs the decision into clear checks with your own agent. People review and ratify them before they are used.
Some checks need a person. Some don’t.
A person checks.
Someone confirms a document or a fact, and records what they found.
A rule checks.
A system checks the same thing the same way, every time.
An agent helps.
An agent gathers and summarises the evidence for a person or a rule.
A person decides.
When a rule can’t settle it, a reviewer makes the call and records why.
Four kinds of check. One decision.
In this fictional supplier onboarding review, a rule, an agent and a person each check part of the case. A reviewer makes the judgement the rules cannot, and an approver makes the final call.
Each assessment is recorded against the same policy version, so automating one check later does not change what the decision was judged against.
- Registration checks recordedRule-based · Supplier Onboarding Policy v2
- Ownership documents summarisedAI-assisted · evidence linked by reference
- Review requiredOwnership structure unclear
- Reviewer judgement recordedProcurement analyst · rationale recorded
- Final decision recordedProcurement lead · within delegated limit
Manual. Assisted. Connected. Agentic.
Manual
People perform the checks against what must be true. Each assessment is recorded.
Assisted
Tools and agents prepare evidence and suggest findings. People still make each check.
Connected
Systems supply data and run rule-based checks directly. People handle judgement and approval.
Agentic
Agents handle routine cases within the authority they are granted. Exceptions and reserved outcomes go to people.
At every stage what must be true, the evidence requirements and the authority stay the same, and so does the record.
Keep the evidence.
Every consequential outcome links to its record: the policy version that governed it, the evidence references used, the checks performed and who acted, as your systems record it. Each recorded assessment has a signed Decision Receipt. Reviews and approvals are linked records alongside it.
A log tells you what a system did. The record keeps what governed the decision. When someone asks why a case went the way it did, you start from that record rather than from memory. See what a Decision Receipt records.
Follow the decision further.
AI agent governance
Put agents to work on consequential decisions and keep each one accountable.
Enhanced due diligence
Make each EDD decision easier to review and to evidence.
What a Decision Receipt records
The record behind each assessment, how receipts link and what verification can show.
Bring one review process.
Tell Qu how the review works today: the documents, systems, checks and approvals involved. If MeshQu can help, we’ll map one decision with you.
MeshQu is currently available for research, evaluation and design-partner deployments. Production availability and support commitments are agreed per engagement.
