ENTERPRISE CHANGE GOVERNANCE
Change, governed
by intelligence.
Metabole governs the full lifecycle of change in regulated firms — from first demand to closure — with Kai, an AI copilot that drafts, surfaces and checks, and an audit trail that holds up to scrutiny.
Working with regulated firms across the UK, Australia and the EU.
AUDIT
Hash-chained, tamper-evident trail — evidence, not reconstruction.
REGIMES
Mapped to FCA s.166, APRA CPS 230 and DORA Article 6.
AI POSTURE
Kai drafts; a human decides. Every field labelled until accepted.
COVERAGE
Demand to closure in one governed loop — nothing bolted on.
The problem
Regulated change is still run in spreadsheets, slide decks and email. The evidence is scattered, the audit trail is reconstructed after the fact, and the lessons are lost within months.
Then the s.166 notice, the CPS 230 review or the DORA examination arrives — and the reconstruction begins. The scrutiny is rising faster than the tooling.
See it run
Watch a change move through the loop.
From captured demand to sealed closure — the actual platform, on demo data.
PLAY WALKTHROUGH · CONTROLS IN THE PLAYER · DEMO TENANT
The Metabole difference
The record is the product.
Most tools track the work and reconstruct the evidence later. Metabole makes the governed record the thing itself — so defensibility isn't a report you run, it's a state you're always in.
Explore the platform →A gate can be passed only by resolution — or a waiver with recorded justification.
Meet Kai
Intelligence you can defend.
Kai drafts assessments, surfaces relevant past lessons, and flags where a control is missing. It never decides. Every field Kai drafts is labelled until a human accepts it, and every interaction is written to the audit log.
Over-honest about AI involvement, by design.
- KAI NEVER DECIDES
- LABELLED UNTIL A HUMAN ACCEPTS
- OVERRIDES BECOME INSPECTABLE WAIVERS
- HASH-CHAINED, TAMPER-EVIDENT TRAIL
Residual risk assessed as LOW. Rollback path evidenced in staging run #47; segregation-of-duties control CTRL-077 attached. Two prior incidents surfaced from closed records — neither pattern present here.
Audit log · append-only
Built for the people accountable
When the question is "how was this decided?"
“Defensible, not reconstructed.”
When the s.166 letter arrives, the evidence is already assembled — attributable, timestamped, sealed.
See the CRO view →HEAD OF CHANGE“One spine, not ten trackers.”
Demand to closure in a single governed loop — no swivel-chair reconciliation across tools.
See the Change view →HEAD OF COMPLIANCE“Mapped to your obligations.”
SMCR, CPS 230 and DORA obligations traced to live changes — evidenced as you go, not after.
See the Compliance view →Resources
Insight, not noise.
Surviving a s.166: evidence you can hand over on day one
What skilled-person reviewers ask for, and how sealed records answer it.
GuideCPS 230 and change: controls that travel with the work
A practical mapping from APRA expectations to gate criteria.
BriefingDORA Article 6, operationalised
From ICT risk framework on paper to a governed loop in production.
If you've been waiting for a change platform that takes governance as seriously as you do — we should talk.
See Metabole against a change you're governing right now.
Request a demo