How we use AI in our own work

This statement explains, in plain language, how artificial intelligence is used in the creation of the content we publish: our white papers, application notes, articles and website material. It reflects our practice; it is not a claim of compliance with any particular law, and it does not disclose security-sensitive detail.

1. Why we use AI

We use AI to work efficiently: to help with early research and discovery, to explore and structure ideas, to prepare working drafts, and to assist with editing and proofreading. AI helps our team move faster from a blank page to a considered piece. It does not replace the judgement, expertise or accountability of the people who produce our work.

2. What it covers

This statement applies to the content IntelekIQ publishes about AI governance, security and adoption for professional firms; you can explore that content in our white paper library and our articles. It covers our own use of AI as a publisher. It is separate from how our Secure Law and Secure Accounting appliances handle client data for the firms that use them; those products are designed so that confidential client material is processed under the firm’s own control, and are described in their own documentation.

3. Who is responsible

A qualified human editor is accountable for every item we publish. People, not models, set the purpose and position of a piece, decide which sources are authoritative, verify the material claims, shape the final text and give explicit approval to publish.

We do not publish anything solely on the authority of an AI system. Where a subject is higher-impact (for example a statement of law, a regulatory timeline, or a claim that could affect a reader’s decisions), we apply additional, specialist review before it goes out.

We use AI to accelerate research and drafting, not to outsource responsibility. A named editor sets the strategy, verifies the material claims, shapes the final work and approves every publication.

4. The safeguards we apply

Our practice includes the following:

• ▪Approved tools, authorised use. We use approved AI tools for defined purposes, and we do not treat any tool as suitable for every kind of information.
• ▪Protecting information. We do not place confidential, personal or client-provided material into AI services unless the use is specifically authorised and appropriately protected. Model output is treated as unverified until a person has checked it.
• ▪Verifying claims at source. We check material facts, figures, quotations, dates and legal or regulatory statements against primary or reputable sources, and we date claims that depend on the law as it stands. Fluent text is not evidence.
• ▪Accuracy, fairness and rights. We review our content for accuracy, originality, fair representation, copyright and permissions, and foreseeable impact on the reader.
• ▪Specialist review by risk. The depth of review scales with the stakes: a routine explainer and a legal, financial or compliance claim are not held to the same bar.
• ▪A record of accountability. We keep proportionate records of sources, verification and approval, so that our decisions can be reconstructed if a reader questions them.

5. Transparency

We aim to be transparent where it is material to understanding our content, and to avoid both concealment and indiscriminate labelling that tells a reader nothing useful. Responsible AI assistance does not require an “AI-generated” label on every paragraph; equally, a general statement like this one does not replace a specific disclosure where the law or the context calls for one. Where additional content-level disclosure is warranted, we provide it.

6. Corrections and contact

We remain accountable for what we publish. If you believe any of our content is inaccurate, misleading, infringing or otherwise concerning, please tell us through our contact page. We will investigate substantiated concerns and correct or withdraw content where appropriate.

7. Review

We review this statement at least once a year, and sooner after a material change in the law, our tools or our process, so that it continues to reflect what we actually do.

Effective date: 2 August 2026  ·  Next scheduled review: by August 2027  ·  Version 1.0