Reviewing a critical process
Identifies risks within individual process activities and assesses their likelihood and impact. Gives teams a risk register that distinguishes exposure before controls from the risk that remains.
— Operations & Process
Identifies step-level risks across seven categories, scores likelihood and impact, tests the control meant to catch each, and computes residual risk into a register with owners and dates.
1 week → ~15 minutes
For a typical multi-document review workflow
No coding required
— USE CASES
Identifies risks within individual process activities and assesses their likelihood and impact. Gives teams a risk register that distinguishes exposure before controls from the risk that remains.
Examines whether documented controls address the risks they are intended to manage. Highlights gaps and residual exposure that require further attention.
Provides a mitigation plan with owners and target dates, focused on the risks that matter most. Makes accountability and the rationale for action explicit.
Summarises exposure through a category-level heatmap and identifies risks that warrant escalation. Gives leadership a focused basis for discussing risk acceptance and corrective action.
— HOW IT BEHAVES
The mechanics behind this specific template — what it reads, what it calculates, and where a human stays in the loop.
All of your process documentation and run data is processed as one set, so patterns across documents surface instead of being read one file at a time.
Findings on the end-to-end process are written up as a document that reads like professional output, with each claim tied back to a process step.
Each process step is assessed against explicit criteria you control, so the same standard is applied across the end-to-end process on every run.
Facts and fields are lifted out of process documentation and run data and held in a consistent shape, process step by process step.
Operational risks often sit across process documents, control descriptions and individual judgement, making exposure difficult to compare and accountability easy to blur. In practice it shows up as reviewing a critical process: identifies risks within individual process activities and assesses their likelihood and impact. Gives teams a risk register that distinguishes exposure before controls from the risk that remains. The value sits in the rigour, not the typing — yet the rigour is exactly what gets traded away when there is only 1 week of capacity for it.
Skillsize turns that work into a Skill: you supply the material, and what comes back is process-level risk register covering seven risk categories, with likelihood and impact assessments with inherent and residual risk scores. The criteria, ordering and review points that make the answer trustworthy are encoded in the Skill itself — which is the difference between a structured method and a prompt someone pastes in. The practical effect: 1 week of manual work becomes a ~15 minutes run, held to an identical standard on the tenth engagement as on the first.
Operational risk assessment exports as a structured SKILL.md file and is MCP-ready, so the same method runs in ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot or your own AI products. Adapt it to your methodology, and the intelligence stays yours — not locked to one vendor.
Identifies where adoption of a new system, process or way of working stalls after go-live, with an evidence-backed report on barriers, workarounds and differences between functions.
Assesses AI readiness through anonymous staff evidence, identifying where AI can improve day-to-day work and the practical barriers that could prevent those gains.
Maps how an organisation actually operates using anonymous accounts from its people, producing an evidence-backed diagnostic of responsibilities, decisions, handoffs and duplicated effort.
Reads a set of weekly status notes for progress, blockers and RAG, charts the trend, and writes an executive digest focused on trajectory.
Reviews a proposed change against your change policy and returns a governed advisory decision — approve, approve with conditions, defer to the change board or reject — weighing risk, blast radius and rollback, with a change manager sign-off required before anything reaches production.
Assesses a refund or compensation request against the contract terms and refund policy that govern it, then returns a decision on approving it in full, in part, offering a goodwill gesture or declining, with every element of the remedy traced to the clause that allows it and anything beyond an agent's authority routed for review.