A tailored course, built for your situation
Mastering AI Act Compliance; A Step-by-Step Guide to Regulator-Ready Governance
Build auditable, regulator-facing AI governance systems with confidence and precision
Who this is for
Principal ICs in data and AI platforms at large tech firms navigating incoming regulatory pressure, especially under the EU AI Act
Who this is not for
Entry-level compliance staff, non-technical AI ethicists, or practitioners without active involvement in system design or integration
What you walk away with
- Produce regulator-facing documentation that passes review without escalation
- Become the default assignee for AI Act-related compliance tasks from legal and risk teams
- Structure reusable control mappings between AI Act requirements and engineering outputs
- Lead internal training sessions on compliance expectations for peer engineering teams
- Reduce rework by anticipating auditor follow-up questions in first-draft artefacts
The 12 modules (with all 144 chapters)
- What the AI Act means by a 'high-risk' AI system
- How classification differs from GDPR or SOC 2
- Mapping AI Act categories to real data platform use cases
- When general purpose AI becomes regulated
- Identifying model lifecycle stages under review
- The role of transparency in system classification
- How open source models affect compliance scope
- Vendor dependencies that trigger AI Act obligations
- Geographic reach and applicability to US-based teams
- Differences between AI Act and NIST AI RMF scope
- Key dates in the enforcement rollout timeline
- Preparing your inventory of regulated systems
- When compliance teams should engage in sprint planning
- Defining handoff moments between MLOps and legal
- Creating escalation paths for ambiguous use cases
- Documenting decision logs for algorithmic changes
- Setting thresholds for re-evaluation after model drift
- Aligning with security teams on data provenance
- Working with product managers on feature disclosures
- Managing scope overlap with privacy teams
- Clarifying roles in multi-cloud AI deployments
- Establishing change control for model parameters
- Versioning model documentation alongside code
- Using Jira workflows to track compliance tasks
- What regulators expect to see in system documentation
- How to structure a model datasheet for review
- Including training data provenance and limitations
- Describing system purpose without marketing fluff
- Documenting accuracy metrics by use case
- Recording human oversight mechanisms
- Specifying intended deployment environments
- Detailing input-output specifications clearly
- Linking documentation to version-controlled code
- Automating documentation updates via CI/CD
- Using templates that satisfy Article 13 requirements
- Preparing for follow-up questions during review
- Defining risk levels based on use case impact
- Mapping risk categories to technical controls
- Conducting regular risk reassessments
- Integrating risk scoring into model validation
- Documenting mitigation strategies for each risk
- Using risk matrices tailored to AI outcomes
- Handling bias detection in pre-deployment
- Setting thresholds for model performance drift
- Evaluating robustness under edge cases
- Logging decisions around risk acceptance
- Engaging external experts when needed
- Maintaining risk logs across model lifecycle
- Proving data was collected legally and ethically
- Documenting data preprocessing steps
- Tracking dataset versioning and updates
- Validating representativeness of training data
- Logging data filtering and exclusion rules
- Handling synthetic data in training sets
- Demonstrating data relevance to model task
- Auditing data labelling processes
- Ensuring annotation consistency across batches
- Storing data quality metrics over time
- Linking data provenance to model decisions
- Preparing datasets for third-party inspection
- Different types of model explainability by use case
- When to use SHAP, LIME, or feature importance
- Balancing explanation depth with usability
- Creating user guidance for interpretable outputs
- Documenting model uncertainty and confidence
- Explaining model limitations to non-technical users
- Aligning explanations with high-risk category rules
- Generating standardized explanation reports
- Linking explanations to decision impact
- Updating explanations after retraining
- Validating explanations with test scenarios
- Using dashboards to communicate model behavior
- Defining meaningful human review points
- Setting triggers for human-in-the-loop
- Designing interfaces for effective intervention
- Documenting review frequency and scope
- Training reviewers to detect model failures
- Logging human override decisions
- Measuring effectiveness of oversight
- Avoiding tokenistic oversight design
- Integrating alerts with monitoring systems
- Specifying fallback procedures
- Reviewing oversight logs during audits
- Scaling oversight across global teams
- Identifying attack vectors unique to ML models
- Protecting models from data poisoning
- Preventing model inversion attacks
- Hardening APIs against misuse
- Securing model update channels
- Validating inputs to prevent adversarial examples
- Monitoring for unauthorized access
- Logging security-relevant events
- Using sandbox environments for testing
- Integrating with existing security operations
- Responding to detected breaches
- Documenting security controls for review
- Defining accuracy metrics relevant to use case
- Testing models beyond training data
- Measuring performance across subgroups
- Evaluating model stability over time
- Detecting concept drift in production
- Setting thresholds for retraining
- Validating model updates before deployment
- Using A/B testing for change validation
- Monitoring for silent failures
- Logging performance degradation
- Reporting reliability to stakeholders
- Establishing performance baselines
- What regulators want to see in audit logs
- Logging model development decisions
- Tracking changes to training data
- Recording hyperparameter tuning
- Storing model evaluation results
- Maintaining version history for artefacts
- Securing access to log files
- Setting retention periods by regulation
- Automating log exports for review
- Integrating logging with CI/CD pipelines
- Verifying log integrity
- Preparing logs for third-party inspection
- Determining if internal or notified body assessment applies
- Gathering required documentation packages
- Conducting internal mock assessments
- Identifying external auditor expectations
- Scheduling assessment windows
- Assigning roles during review
- Responding to findings and objections
- Updating systems based on feedback
- Maintaining post-assessment records
- Preparing for unannounced follow-ups
- Leveraging certification for new projects
- Using assessment outcomes to strengthen internal practices
- Planning for model updates and retraining
- Reassessing risk after major changes
- Updating documentation automatically
- Revalidating human oversight design
- Rechecking data quality after source changes
- Re-evaluating model performance in production
- Revising conformity claims after changes
- Notifying authorities of significant modifications
- Archiving decommissioned models properly
- Transferring compliance knowledge during team changes
- Incorporating lessons from past reviews
- Scaling compliance practices across teams
How this maps to your situation
- Pre-launch phase: scoping system under AI Act
- Mid-development: embedding compliance into workflows
- Pre-audit: preparing documentation and evidence
- Post-assessment: maintaining and scaling compliance
Before vs. after
What's included with your purchase
- 12 modules with 12 chapters each (144 chapters)
- Downloadable templates and worked examples for every module
- Hand-built implementation playbook delivered alongside course access
- 30-day money-back guarantee
Delivery and format
- Course and learning environment access provisioned within 24 hours of purchase
- Hand-built implementation playbook delivered alongside course access
Format: Text-based modules and chapters in the Art of Service learning environment, plus downloadable templates and worked examples for every chapter, plus the hand-built implementation playbook delivered alongside course access.
Time investment: Approximately 90 minutes per week over 12 weeks, designed for working professionals.
How this compares to the alternatives
Unlike generic AI ethics courses, this program focuses on concrete, regulator-facing artefacts and decisions. Compared to vendor-specific training, it builds transferable compliance fluency aligned with law, not product features.
Frequently asked
Within 24 hours your account in the learning environment is provisioned and the tailored implementation playbook is delivered alongside it.