Policy and Procedure Governance Consulting
Ownership, approvals, impact assessment, and sustainment—so policy intent actually shows up in day-to-day execution.
What this solves
When policies and procedures drift, the organization pays twice: once in operational friction, and again during audits and remediation. Governance fixes the root issue—how content is owned, changed, implemented, and monitored.
This is not a tool selection project. It’s a governance model you can run with whatever platform you already use.
Common signals
- Multiple “authoritative” versions of the same guidance exist across teams.
- Policy updates go live with no effective date, no training plan, and no impact tracking.
- Audit issues repeat because procedures don’t translate to controls and evidence.
- Exceptions are approved by email with no tracking or expiration.
- Nobody can confidently answer: “What changed, who was impacted, and how do we know it worked?”
How the work runs
The work is phased so you get value quickly and avoid an “enterprise redesign” that never ships.
Map what exists, who uses it, and where failures occur (versioning, approvals, access, adoption).
Set ownership, reviewers, approval thresholds, and what triggers deeper review.
Draft → impact assess → approve → publish → implement → monitor → review.
Prove the workflow on a high-risk area before scaling.
Create a cadence and dashboard so the model doesn’t degrade after launch.
Client retains final approvals and risk ratings; McLean Risk delivers structure and artifacts.
What you get
You leave with artifacts you can operate—regardless of tool or turnover.
Scope, roles, decision rights, meeting cadence, and escalation paths.
A repeatable process for assessing impact before publishing.
Policy and procedure templates with required sections and evidence prompts.
Naming, versioning, deprecation, effective dates, and publication standards.
Time-bounded exceptions with visibility and review cadence.
Review compliance, backlog age, exceptions volume, and finding recurrence.
Quick self-check
If you can’t confidently say “yes” to most of these, governance is probably the real issue.
- Every document has a named owner and a defined review date.
- Change requests include an impact assessment (who/what/when/how).
- Effective dates and release notes are standard.
- Procedures specify evidence (what proves the step happened).
- Exceptions are tracked, approved, time-bounded, and reviewed.
- Old versions are formally deprecated (not just overwritten).
FAQ
What’s the difference between policy and procedure?
Policy states intent/control direction (what must be true). Procedure defines steps, roles, systems, and evidence (how it happens).
Do we need a GRC tool?
No. Governance failures are usually decision-rights and workflow problems. Tools help, but they don’t fix unclear ownership.
How do you avoid bureaucracy?
By using thresholds: low-risk edits follow a lightweight path; high-risk changes require deeper review. Match effort to risk.
Who owns final approvals and risk ratings?
The client. McLean Risk provides structure and recommendations, but final decisions remain with the organization.