The Human Authority Index (HAI) is the first structured framework for measuring, scoring, and assuring human decision authority across AI-influenced systems. Not a checklist. Not a policy template. A governance standard.

When an AI system influences a decision; about a person, a process, or a resource, someone is still accountable for that outcome. HAI answers a question that no other framework has formally asked: how much authority do humans actually hold in that moment?
Not how much authority the policy says they hold. Not what the vendor promised in the sales deck. What is demonstrably, defensibly, measurably true.
HAI™ scores organisations across four theoretical dimensions — each weighted equally at 25 points — producing a composite index from 0 to 100. The score travels with your assurance artefacts into board reports, regulatory submissions, and workforce governance frameworks.

Decision Clarity (DC) — Are roles, responsibilities, and decision boundaries between humans and automated systems explicitly defined and understood? Covers override capability, decision ownership, escalation architecture, and explainability.
Cognitive Sustainability (CS) — Are the cognitive demands placed on operators within sustainable limits — and do people retain the practiced skill to intervene effectively when the system fails or produces unexpected output?
Psychosocial Safety (PS) — Do operators experience genuine agency, meaningful work, and the organisational safety to raise concerns and act on their judgment — without fear of blame or unreasonable surveillance? Anchored in eudaimonic work theory and the NSW WHS Act 2026.
Work Design (WD) — Has the work system been deliberately designed to preserve human authority — or has automation been layered over roles that were never redesigned to match? Links directly to the Intelligent Work Blueprint.
Each dimension is scored across governance questions weighted by consequence. Override Capability and Operational Skill Currency carry the highest weights within their dimensions — because their failure modes are the most acute and least recoverable..
Identify all critical decision points and the current human-system authority split.
Score each decision point across the four HAI dimensions.
Define the target state of authority distribution aligned to risk and strategy.
Establish ongoing measurement and governance cadence.

THE HAI SCORE
The composite HAI score runs from 0 to 100. It is not a pass or fail. It is a starting position, one that tells your organisation where human authority is strong, where it is absent, and where investment in governance will produce the clearest return.
Most organisations, on first assessment, score between 18 and 35. That is not a condemnation. It is a baseline. The fellowship exists to move that number with documented evidence of every step.

HAI™ is not a one-time assessment. It threads through every phase of the Executive Fellowship and travels with you afterwards. The Fellowship produces a HAI™ score across all four dimensions that your organisation owns — embedded in your board artefacts and revisited annually through the Alumni Circle.
Join us and discover what we can do for you.
We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.