The source file is scattered.
Ownership information, supporting documents and their source dates sit in different folders.
Give the reviewer one working context.
Connect requests, documents, source dates and outstanding questions to the case.
Banks & insurers
Make the review visible.
Keep the decision attributable.
Coordinate controlled reviews with customers, counterparties and service providers.
The question behind the policy
“Show us how this review actually happened.”
A written control describes the intended process. A later review asks for this counterparty's documents, the reviewer who assessed them, the exception that was raised and the person who decided what happened next.
Illustrative review request. No real institution or examination is shown.REVIEW REQUESTCOUNTERPARTY FILE
- 01
Which documents were available to the reviewer?
- 02
What did the reviewer ask or flag?
- 03
Who made the decision, and on what basis?
- 04
What was still open afterwards?
A policy alone cannot answer a case-specific question.
CUSTOMER REVIEW
The review resumes. Nobody starts the file again.
A corporate customer supplies a revised ownership declaration. The next reviewer needs the source, the previous question and the reason an exception remains open.
Fewer repeated requests. Clearer reviewer responsibility. The decision keeps its context.
Illustrative workflow. Scope and availability are agreed for the engagement.
THE WORKING RECORD / EXAMPLE
Ownership declaration · Follow-up
- Source
- The current declaration and dated supporting material
- Open question
- A reviewer requests clarification on an ownership change
- Next owner
- The authorised reviewer assesses the response
An illustrative working process
From first contact
to continuing responsibility.
01
Invite the permitted counterpartiesEntity file, ownership declarations and review responsibility
Recorded context02
Request the review documentsDiligence requests, uploaded supporting files and source dates
Recorded context03
Assign independent human reviewersReviewer findings, questions and responses
Recorded context04
Record approvals, exceptions and reasonsHuman approval, conditions and linked documents
Recorded context05
Track follow-up and supervisory requestsScheduled reviews, exceptions and renewed checks
Recorded contextOne review, with its context
The work creates the record.
Keep the request, source files, human review, exception and decision connected. When a colleague, auditor or supervisor asks later, the team can reconstruct the sequence instead of searching across inboxes and spreadsheets.
COUNTERPARTY REVIEWILLUSTRATIVE PROCESS
- 01Request and source
Record what was requested, which document version was supplied and when.
- 02Human review
Keep questions and findings with the named reviewer and the files they examined.
- 03Exception and decision
Show who resolved the question, the reason recorded and any conditions still open.
- 04Later follow-up
Return to the same relationship when documents expire or another review is due.
What can go wrong
A review can stall between teams.
Illustrative review examples. Qualified reviewers retain responsibility for customer, risk and approval decisions.
Two reviewers are waiting on each other.
A question is passed between teams without a named owner or visible answer.
Assign the next decision.
Set reviewer responsibility, keep questions and responses together and show unresolved items.
An exception has no visible rationale.
The outcome is recorded, but a later reviewer cannot find the reason or supporting version.
Record the human decision in context.
Link the reviewer, reasons, conditions and supporting documents, then track the next review.
Map your review process.
Bring the handover or review that takes too much chasing. We will map its people, documents and next actions, then clarify the right configuration.