Students are using AI under rules {you haven't written yet.}
Rapid governance sprints for institutions where adoption outran policy. Decision rights, acceptable use, academic integrity standards, and an institutional AI roadmap — drafted, stress-tested, and committee-ready in about 90 days, not three semesters.
FREQUENTLY FEATURED IN:
What separates a governance sprint from a policy binder.
Every provost recognizes the gap: policy by vacuum, integrity cases with no standard, procurement flying blind. How you close it determines whether it holds.
Big-Firm Consulting
Template Policies
Alex Goryachev
What a sprint produces. Documents, not advice.
Everything arrives ready for your committees to amend and adopt.
Governance Architecture
Who decides what, at which level, with which escalation paths — mapped to your existing shared governance rather than bolted on top of it.
Policy Drafts
Acceptable-use policy, academic integrity standards, and communications strategy delivered as documents your committees can amend and adopt — not a slide deck about why policy matters.
Institutional AI Roadmap
The sequence of decisions after the policies pass, so governance becomes a starting gun rather than a finish line.
How a 90-day sprint works.
Grounded in live governance work across a 22-campus system — adapted to your institution's bodies and calendar.
Exposure review
Where the institution is exposed today — integrity, privacy, procurement, communications — and which committees must own each answer.
Drafting with your committees
Policies drafted with the bodies that must pass them, informed by governance operating at 22-campus scale. Co-authorship is the adoption strategy.
Committee-ready package
Final drafts, comms plan, and roadmap delivered ready for senate and cabinet calendars — with Alex available through adoption.
The playbook came from building inside universities.
As former Managing Director of Innovation Strategy and Head of Global Innovation Centers at Cisco, Alex built global innovation centers and programs inside universities and research institutions across 14 countries — a $1.1B portfolio that generated $400M+ in revenue, innovation tracks for three Olympic Games, and partnerships from Imperial College London to Keio, NUS, University of Toronto, and UNSW Sydney. That operating history is what his assessments measure against.
Countries
University-anchored innovation centers built with partners including Imperial College London, Keio, École Polytechnique, and UNSW Sydney.
Portfolio managed
Innovation strategy at Cisco run with the same discipline these assessments bring to campus: governance, measurement, ROI.
Olympic Games
Three Olympic Games — innovation programs delivered live on the world stage, with immovable deadlines, global partners, and zero tolerance for failure. That's the operating standard behind every campus engagement.
Select higher education engagements
A campus without an AI policy still has one. It's just written by ten thousand students, {one syllabus at a time}.
How exposed is your institution right now?
Bring your current policy — or the blank page where it should be. Replies within one business day.
Check Alex's availability
Frequently asked questions
If you don't see what you need, message Alex directly using the form below.
What should a university AI policy include?
A university AI policy needs five parts at minimum: acceptable use for students, acceptable use for employees, academic integrity standards, data privacy and vendor rules, and clear decision rights for who approves new tools. The usual failure is a values statement with no operational teeth, which leaves deans improvising. Alex Goryachev's governance sprints produce those documents in committee-ready form in about 90 days, drafted with the bodies that have to vote on them.
How long does it take to stand up university AI governance?
Standing up AI governance takes about 90 days at most institutions, provided the policies are drafted with the committees that must approve them rather than handed over at the end. Drafting in isolation adds a full governance cycle, which on many campuses means another year. Alex Goryachev runs those sprints drawing on his seat on the California State University system's AI Working Group, where governance has to work across 22 campuses at once.
How do universities enforce academic integrity rules on AI?
Enforcement of AI integrity rules works when the standard of proof is defined in advance, since detection software is not reliable enough to carry a sanction on its own. Practical policies rely on process evidence: drafts, version history, oral defense, and documented conversation with the student. Alex Goryachev helps integrity boards replace pre-ChatGPT language that keeps losing on appeal, and helps them set consistent sanctions across colleges so outcomes do not depend on which dean hears the case.
Who helps universities write AI policies?
Universities hire Alex Goryachev to draft AI policies, including acceptable-use language, academic integrity standards, and the governance architecture that decides who approves what. He works from his seat on the California State University system's AI Working Group, where the same questions get settled across 22 campuses. Engagements produce documents a committee can adopt, with the review path mapped to the institution's shared governance calendar rather than advisory memos filed and forgotten.
Can AI governance move fast without freezing innovation?
Fast AI governance and campus experimentation are compatible, because clear guardrails are what let faculty and staff try things without calling legal first. The trick is publishing rules for the common cases early and handling edge cases as they arrive, instead of waiting for a policy that covers everything. Alex Goryachev pairs each policy draft with AI-literacy sessions so the rules are understood on the ground, which is where most published policies quietly die.
.svg)
