The Governance Paradox

The question of whether artificial intelligence can be governed may seem philosophical. But in 2025, it has become operational—and urgent. Just reference our recent article on Builder.ai to learn about the escalating risks driven by AI. As generative AI, autonomous agents, and foundation models accelerate their integration into critical systems, the pace of innovation is rapidly outstripping the scaffolding of rules, oversight, and control.

“Governance” in this context is often mistaken for static oversight: policy frameworks, codes of conduct, or aspirational principles. But as defined in the discipline of integrated risk management (IRM), governance is the rule-setting subset of management—the top of the pyramid. True risk control comes from marrying that governance with relentless operational execution: identification, assessment, mitigation, and continuous monitoring.

So: Can AI be governed? The answer is yes—but only if organizations recognize that compliance checklists and PR-friendly charters are no substitute for enterprise-wide, integrated, and adaptive risk management.

Ori Wellington

Orion “Ori” Wellington is the lead editor for The RiskTech Journal and The RTJ Bridge, where he helps shape editorial direction, guide strategic narratives, and support media relations across Wheelhouse Advisors. As a digital editorial advisor, Ori synthesizes trends in risk, technology, and governance, drawing from roles modeled on information security, risk analytics, and IT leadership.

Part of Wheelhouse’s AI-augmented research team, Ori works to distill complex signals into actionable intelligence—bridging expertise across domains and elevating the voice of integrated risk thinking.

https://wheelhouseadvisors.com
Sign up to read this post
Join Now
Next
Next

When the AI Black Box Blows Up