Design a governed path to approved AI models before fragmented access becomes infrastructure.
Conductor is a reference architecture for governed model access: one controlled path with identity, policy, redaction, audit, and cost accountability applied before a request reaches a provider. We adapt it to your constraints, evaluate build-versus-buy options, and define the right implementation path.
Model access fragments faster than most organizations can govern it.
Teams adopt models through disconnected accounts, embedded application integrations, vendor tools, and individual subscriptions. Identity, policy, sensitive-data handling, provider selection, auditability, and cost attribution then vary by team and tool.
Once those access patterns become embedded in applications and workflows, governance becomes a retrofit rather than part of the architecture.
Fragmented accessTeam accounts → embedded integrations → separate records
A controlled request path with governance operating across the full design, not added only at the end.
01
Capture
One governed surface receives the request. Users state the task; model selection follows policy, task fit, and approved choice where required.
02
Route
The task is classified and matched against a capability registry using policy, quality, risk, and cost criteria defined by the organization.
03
Run
The request reaches an approved provider through the selected tenant controls. Fallback, budget, and availability rules are applied where the chosen implementation supports them.
04
Govern
Routing decisions, usage, cost, and the permitted request and response record are captured according to the organization’s privacy, retention, and audit policies.
Cross-cutting governance
Single sign-on and directory-driven provisioning
Role-based access by team, role, and model
Redaction of sensitive data before egress
A unified audit trail across governed requests
Cost attribution to a named team, owner, or business purpose
Cross-cutting controls
Controls follow the request across the architecture.
01
Single sign-on and directory-driven provisioning
02
Role-based access by team, role, and model
03
Redaction of sensitive data before egress
04
A unified audit trail across governed requests
05
Cost attribution to a named team, owner, or business purpose
Logging, retention, permitted request and response capture, redaction behavior, and provider-side controls depend on client policy and the selected implementation. The design reduces unmanaged variation; it does not eliminate risk.
Model registry
A model becomes a governed registry entry, not another dependency scattered through application code.
The design separates model availability from consuming applications. Provider adapters remain modular, but once a provider is connected, adding or changing an approved model should normally become a registry and policy change rather than a release across every application that uses it. The assessment defines the registry model; a pilot must prove that the selected implementation can support it.
01Applications + teams
02Governed request surface
03Policy + capability registry
04Provider adapters
05Approved models
06Usage, evidence + cost records
Build versus buy
An independent evaluation should not begin with a preferred product.
Capable gateway products exist, and several may fit the requirement. The assessment evaluates whether an existing product can satisfy the organization’s identity model, data residency, security posture, provider strategy, operating constraints, and contractual commitments.
Graph42 discloses the criteria, assumptions, and weights before scoring begins. The result may support a product configuration, a tailored build, a split approach, or a decision not to proceed.
Criteria and weights disclosed before products are scored
A shortlist with inclusion and exclusion reasoning documented
A recommendation with assumptions and dissenting considerations retained
Build, buy, and split options compared against implementation and operating responsibilities
Foundational capability
Use enterprise context to improve routing, policy, and traceability.
When routing decisions depend on enterprise meaning, Graph42 can design a governed knowledge graph or context layer connecting data, systems, policies, people, and business entities. This is not required for every Conductor engagement, but it becomes valuable when prompt wording alone cannot determine what a request may access, which model fits, or which evidence supports an output.
Route using the entities, relationships, and policies a task touches, not prompt wording alone
Ground agent context and memory in governed enterprise sources
Apply policy through relationships among users, roles, data, systems, and permitted actions
Trace outputs to the source records, entities, and relationships that informed them
More than one team already uses or is preparing to use models through internal tools, workflows, or production systems
Model access is distributed across vendor accounts, embedded application integrations, or unmanaged subscriptions
Security, legal, privacy, or compliance teams need consistent controls before broader adoption
The organization cannot reliably attribute usage and cost to a team, owner, or business purpose
Applications are becoming tightly coupled to individual providers or model-specific integrations
The organization needs a deliberate multi-model strategy rather than uncontrolled proliferation
If none of these is true yet, the work is premature and we will say so.
Engagement
A two-week current-state and architecture assessment
One defined scope, one documented decision at the end. Pricing on request.
Phase 1 · Current-state and architecture assessment
Typical duration: Two weeks
Purpose. Adapt the reference architecture to the client’s identity, data, security, compliance, cost, provider, and operating constraints.
What it includes
Current model-access and use-case inventory
Stakeholder and operating-constraint review
Identity, security, privacy, retention, and audit requirements
Architecture adapted to the client environment
Capability and provider evaluation criteria
Build, buy, and split-path analysis
Pilot scope and decision gates, where proceeding is justified
Written recommendation and decision record
What the client provides
An accountable sponsor
Technical, security, privacy, procurement, and delivery representatives as required
Current architecture and identity information
Relevant policies and data-handling constraints
Current provider, contract, tool, and usage information
Access to subject-matter experts during the defined assessment window
You receive a decision record, not a proposal disguised as one. Proceed to a 30-day governed pilot, configure a selected product, build with Graph42 or another team, revise the scope, or stop. Stopping is a legitimate outcome when the evidence shows the work is premature or the value does not justify the operating responsibility.
Phase 2 · Optional next step
30-day governed pilot
A pilot validates the selected architecture with one approved team, a constrained model set, and agreed identity, policy, audit, and cost-accountability controls. Its scope is defined by the assessment rather than assumed in advance.
Optional and follows the assessment
Client-specific, not existing off-the-shelf Graph42 software
Does not automatically imply production readiness
Success and exit criteria written before work begins
Inspect before engaging
Inspect the architecture first.
The reference architecture is available before any commitment. It shows the identity, routing, policy, redaction, audit, and cost-accountability layers the assessment will adapt, allowing a prospective client to judge the design approach before buying the work.