
Diagnose ▸ Prioritize ▸ Design ▸ Govern ▸ Orchestrate ▸ Scale
We close the gap between AI deployment and AI authority, for the humans who govern it and the agents who execute it.
88 percent of organizations deploying AI agents have already had a confirmed or suspected security incident. The gap is not the technology. It is the absence of authorization infrastructure that tells agents what they are permitted to do before they act.
Decision DNA Group builds that infrastructure.
The Decision DNA Diagnostics assess 316 capabilities across 21 domains to surface the decision gaps, governance failures, and logic mismatches causing post-close underperformance, pilot-to-production stalls, and revenue that stalls at the point of adoption. We work at the intersection of M&A integration, AI COE design, and GTM transformation for agentic and consumption-based products.
The diagnostic work is the foundation. The direction is the Registry of Authority, a proprietary governance infrastructure architecture Decision DNA is building to solve the authorization problem at the root of enterprise AI failure.
We are principal-led and built for focused, high-value work. Every engagement is led directly by senior expertise, with access to a broader network of trusted operators, advisors, and specialists when additional depth is needed. This model keeps the work sharp, flexible, and grounded in real enterprise experience.

You've built the frameworks. You've run the bootcamps. You've got the scorecard. But somewhere between the deal thesis and Day 180, value leaks out and nobody can pinpoint exactly where.
The decisions that don't have clear owners. The processes that exist in the playbook but not in practice. The lessons learned that never made it into the
You've built the frameworks. You've run the bootcamps. You've got the scorecard. But somewhere between the deal thesis and Day 180, value leaks out and nobody can pinpoint exactly where.
The decisions that don't have clear owners. The processes that exist in the playbook but not in practice. The lessons learned that never made it into the next integration.
We assess 121 critical integration capabilities, not what your playbook says, but what your teams actually do, and deliver:
Here's what we typically find. Most integration teams are making 70-80% of critical decisions, following their playbooks inconsistently across workstreams, and missing the governance infrastructure to track whether synergies are actually being captured.
We find the gap. You close it.

Something has shifted. You've acquired companies and need to sell their products through your GTM. You're launching AI products alongside your core. Leadership is pushing multi-product expansion and reps keep defaulting to what they know.
When strategy shifts, most companies layer on SPIFs and hope for the best. The underlying decisions st
Something has shifted. You've acquired companies and need to sell their products through your GTM. You're launching AI products alongside your core. Leadership is pushing multi-product expansion and reps keep defaulting to what they know.
When strategy shifts, most companies layer on SPIFs and hope for the best. The underlying decisions stay anchored to the old reality. Reps respond rationally. The new motion stalls.
We assess 20 critical GTM decisions and show you exactly what's blocking your transition:
Here's what we typically find. Most companies in transition have 70-80% of their GTM decisions still aligned to the old strategy.
We find the blockers. You move them in sequence.

You're running pilots, hiring data scientists, buying platforms. But which AI operational capabilities are actually in place?
Which processes are mature versus missing? Where should you invest to move from pilots to production at scale?
We assess 90 critical AI COE capabilities across governance, infrastructure, deployment, and value measu
You're running pilots, hiring data scientists, buying platforms. But which AI operational capabilities are actually in place?
Which processes are mature versus missing? Where should you invest to move from pilots to production at scale?
We assess 90 critical AI COE capabilities across governance, infrastructure, deployment, and value measurement:
Here's what we typically find. Most organizations are making 60-70% of critical AI decisions, following their own AI processes inconsistently, and missing the measurement infrastructure to know what's actually working.
The Orchestration Governance Framework OGF v1.21.1 | April 2026 | Open resource, freely shareable with attribution
The coordination protocols for multi-agent AI are mature. The authority layer is not.
MCP and A2A define how agents connect and communicate. What they do not define is whether agents are organizationally authorized to act on what those protocols enable. That gap is where AI governance fails at scale.
The Orchestration Governance Framework is Decision DNA Group's proposed open standard for multi-platform, multi-agent AI governance. It defines fourteen requirements across two layers: six single-platform governance components that form the foundation, and eight multi-platform authority requirements that address the orchestration problem specifically. It is a standard, not a product. Organizations implement it through whatever combination of process, tooling, and organizational commitment satisfies the requirements.
We are publishing it as a starting point, not a finished product. It will improve through use, critique, and contribution from practitioners working on the problem. If you are working on any part of this, we want to hear from you.
What the OGF covers: Cross-platform authority governance, authority inheritance, provenance tracking, system-level behavioral governance, accountability attribution, and governance debt.
What the OGF does not cover: Model governance, cybersecurity and identity access management, content guardrails, data governance, or vendor selection.
This standard will be updated as the market evolves and as practitioners contribute operational experience. Submit feedback at chance@decisiondnagroup.com
© 2026 Decision DNA Group

The governance gap is not coming.88 percent of organizations deploying AI agents confirmed or suspected a security incident last year. The technology is not the problem. The authorization infrastructure is.

Every agent deployment needs four answers.What is it authorized to do. Under what conditions. Who is accountable. How will you know when something goes wrong. Most organizations can answer one or two at best.

Governance decays faster than anyone is watching.AI systems change. Processes change. People change. The governance that worked at deployment is not the governance you have today. Most organizations have no mechanism for detecting the difference

The solution is infrastructure, not policy.Decision DNA is building the Registry of Authority, a governance layer that makes agent authorization version-controlled, evidence-based, and enforceable at runtime. It is in development. The conversation is open now.
This short video is based on a Substack post "What the AI Sees". A thought experiment - published in April.
LINK: https://chancecurtiss.substack.com/p/what-the-ai-sees