Governance Intelligence Suite
Pre-Engagement
Discovery
Run in order: Scanner → Control Room → Map
Phase I
Authority Assessment
Phase II
Athletic Authority Diagnostic™
Run steps 1–7 in sequence
Phase III
Athletic Authority Stabilization™
Ongoing
Authority Governance™
Researcher
Strategist
Editor
Crafter
Authority Check
Authority Control Room
Live governance stability monitoring
Describe the governance situation
Include the institution, key actors, triggering event, and any known authority conflicts. The Control Room will map authority drift across the ten power centers and generate stabilization actions.
Stabilization System
6-Stage SOP Workflow
1
Disruption Intake
Initial signal map
2
Authority Mapping
Authority map
3
Drift Detection
Drift pattern report
4
Risk Diagnosis
Risk profile
5
Mandate Stabilization
Updated authority structure
6
Governance Reinforcement
Ongoing governance system
Stage 1: Disruption Intake
Identify the triggering event and map initial stakeholders
Triggering event
Key stakeholders involved
→ Initial signal map
Output
Output will appear here after running.
North Signal — Structural Diagnostic Suite
Authority Drift Risk Scanner
7 indicators · 21-point structural instability index · Produces an Authority Drift Profile
1 of 7
1
Escalation Compression
Operational and cross-functional decisions increasingly escalate to the Athletic Director rather than resolving within leadership domains.
Diagnostic Signals
·Do leaders routinely escalate decisions to the AD rather than resolving them locally?
·Are leadership meetings dominated by issue resolution rather than strategic discussion?
·Does the AD regularly intervene in operational conflicts?
North Signal — Authority Structure
Athletic Authority Map
Ten Power Centers model · Red indicators show common drift pressure vectors · Click any node for details
Inner Ring — Institutional Authority
Athletic Director
Central operational authority.
President / Provost
Ultimate institutional authority.
Board of Trustees
Governance oversight.
Coaches
Program leadership.
General Counsel
Legal counsel.
Outer Ring — External Authority
NIL Collectives
Fund athlete compensation.
Major Conferences
Set competitive frameworks, revenue distribution models, scheduling, and compliance requirements that bind member institutions.
Media & Commercial Rights Partners
Broadcast networks (ESPN, Fox), multimedia rights holders (Learfield/TPG), streaming platforms, NIL marketplace infrastructure.
Courts & Legislators
Redefine the legal framework for athlete compensation, employment status, and institutional liability.
Student-Athletes
Market-empowered but institutionally embedded.
Regulatory Enforcement Layer
College Sports Commission
NIL Go, CAPS, investigations, postseason bans, fines
Federal Regulatory Enforcement
OMB grant/contract eligibility, effective Aug 1 2026
Authority Drift occurs when external forces make commitments, set precedents, or move faster than the internal structure can absorb. The AD sits at that collision point.
Inner Ring (Institutional)
Outer Ring (External)
Institutional pathway
External pressure pathway
Authority Drift pressure
Regulatory enforcement
No scan data loaded. Run the Authority Control Room scan to populate with institution-specific authority conditions.
North Signal — Proposal Generator
Athletics Advisory Proposal
Generates a branded Word document ready to send to the client.
1
Engagement Details
2
Situation Narrative
3
Scope + Pricing
4
Review + Export
Institution
Contacts
Situation Notes
Paste notes from your scoping conversation or a Control Room scan.
North Signal — Milestone 2: Classify
Athletic Authority Drift Scorecard™
10 items · 5 domains · 30-point Authority Drift Index
1 of 5
1
Authority Clarity
1.Are there decisions in your department where it’s unclear who has final authority — where people act based on assumption rather than documented ownership?
Rarely — authority is clear and documented across most areas
Sometimes — some areas are clear, others are ambiguous
Often or constantly — many decisions lack a clear owner
2.Do different stakeholders (coaches, compliance, senior staff) operate with different understandings of who owns the same decision?
Rarely — stakeholders generally agree on who owns what
Sometimes — alignment on some decisions but not others
Often or constantly — multiple people frequently believe they own the same decision
North Signal — Milestone 2: Classify
AD Escalation Load Assessment
5 escalation categories · 3 dimensions · Produces an AD Escalation Load Profile
1 of 5
1
Recruiting & Roster
Decisions flowing to the AD involving recruiting commitments, roster management, and student-athlete transfer activity.
Escalation Examples
›NIL disputes affecting recruiting decisions
›Recruiting commitments requiring AD sign-off
›Student-athlete transfer decisions escalating to AD review
Escalation Frequency
How often do decisions in this category escalate to the AD?
RarelyConstantly1
Decision Resolution Time
Once escalated to the AD, how long do decisions in this category take to resolve?
Very fastVery slow1
Leadership Autonomy
How much autonomy do direct reports have to resolve decisions in this category without AD involvement?
No autonomyFull autonomy5
North Signal — Milestone 2: Classify
Diagnostic Summary
ADI Scorecard + Drift Risk Scanner — Combined Results
○ADI Scorecard
10-item · 5-domain · 30-point
○Drift Risk Scanner
6-indicator · radar chart
Complete both instruments to view the combined summary
Results will appear here once the ADI Scorecard and Drift Risk Scanner are both complete.
North Signal — Milestone 1: Identify
Sponsor Alignment Session
Facilitated intake · 35 questions · 5 areas
Session Details
Institution
Athletic Director
0/35 answered
Sponsor Alignment
AD mandate, presidential relationship, and engagement framing
1
How did you come to this conversation — what brought governance to the top of your agenda right now?
Advisor Note — What to Listen For
Listen for whether this is reactive (a crisis) or proactive (anticipating pressure). Reactive entries often mean the drift is already active. Proactive entries mean you have a window to build architecture before it breaks.
2
How would you describe your current relationship with the President — and how often are you in direct conversation about program strategy?
⚑ Drift signal question
Advisor Note — What to Listen For
This tells you two things: how much institutional cover the AD has, and whether the President is already engaged or needs to be brought in. If the AD says "we rarely talk about strategy," that's an Escalation Compression signal — the President is either disengaged or the AD is absorbing without escalating.
Weekly — aligned on strategy and direction
Monthly — periodic check-ins on major decisions
Quarterly — primarily around Board meetings
As needed — mostly transactional
Infrequent — relationship is strained or distant
3
Does the President know this engagement is happening — and how was it framed to them?
⚑ Drift signal question
Advisor Note — What to Listen For
If the President doesn't know, you don't have the right buyer yet. The AD can be the sponsor but not the authorizing executive. This also tells you whether the AD has the political capital to implement what you produce.
Yes — President initiated or co-sponsored this conversation
Yes — President is aware and supportive
Yes — President is aware but not yet engaged
Not yet — I plan to bring them in after this conversation
No — this is AD-level only for now
4
What does success look like for you at the end of this engagement — what would have to be different?
Advisor Note — What to Listen For
This is your scope signal. If they say "I want to know who owns what decisions," that's a Baseline engagement. If they say "I need the Board to stop getting involved in operational decisions," that's a Stabilization engagement. If they say "I want to make sure we're set up for the next five years," that's a retained relationship.
5
Who else needs to be part of this process — and are there stakeholders who might resist or complicate it?
⚑ Drift signal question
Advisor Note — What to Listen For
Listen for who is conspicuously absent from their answer. If they don't mention General Counsel, that's a gap. If they don't mention the President, that's a gap. If they mention a specific donor or Board member as a complication, that's a Donor Influence Leak signal.
Area 1 of 5
May 21, 2026
Phase 1 of 7: Opening Context10 min
Program Context
Ceiling Signals — active at session time
Facilitator Script
Thank you for making the time for this. What we're going to do today is walk through a structured assessment of how authority actually flows in your athletics program — not the org chart version, but the real decision architecture. We'll look at where decisions are landing, whether they're landing where they should, and where the system may be creating friction that's absorbing your bandwidth. This isn't an audit and it's not a critique — it's a diagnostic. Think of it like a governance MRI. By the end, we'll have a clear picture of where your authority architecture is strong, where it's drifting, and what that means for your program.
What brought governance to your agenda? What made this feel like the right time for this conversation?
Coach Note
Listen for whether this is proactive (building ahead of growth) or reactive (something already broke or is breaking). The framing here tells you whether you're dealing with a builder or a fixer — this shapes the entire engagement.
How would you describe your relationship with the President?
Strong partnership — regular strategic alignment, mutual trust on decision boundaries
Functional — periodic check-ins, generally supportive but not deeply engaged in athletics
Distant — minimal interaction, athletics operates largely independently
Strained — active tension or misalignment on athletics direction or authority
Coach Note
This is the single most important structural relationship in college athletics governance. The answer here predicts 80% of the authority drift patterns you'll find in the rest of the session.
Any nuance worth noting on the relationship? (optional)
Coach Note
Capture the common real-world case the four options miss — e.g., strong on strategy but strained on a specific issue, or functional with a specific trust gap. This free-text note lets the brief reflect the actual texture of the relationship.
0/10 scored
Researcher — Signal Mapping
Identify decision pressure and authority ambiguity
Output
Output will appear here after running.