Are businesses ready to trust AI agents with real authority?

Author: Priscilla Gaudoin, Head of Risk & Compliance, published July 2026

Topics: Accountability, AI Risk, Explainability, Governance, Leadership

Regions and Regulators: UK - FCA

 Time to read: 4 minutes

TL:DR

• Introduction
• Trust has to be earned through control
• What does this mean for you and your firm?

The move from experimentation to authority

Across financial services, there is growing excitement about AI agents. The promise is compelling. Systems that operate independently, drive efficiency, and unlock new capabilities at scale.

But there’s a question many organisations are avoiding:

Are you really ready to trust these systems with real authority?

Experimentation is widespread. Pilots are underway. Proofs of concept are delivering results. But moving from controlled testing to real world deployment is a different challenge entirely.

Because authority changes the stakes.

An AI agent with real authority is not just supporting decisions, it is making them. Acting on behalf of the firm and influencing client outcomes by moving money, information and risk across the organisation.

And yet, in many cases, the governance models underpinning these systems have not caught up.

There is a tendency to assume that existing controls, model validation, risk committees, audit processes are sufficient. But these were designed for system where humans remain central to decision making.

Agentic AI shifts that centre of gravity.

Trust, in this context, cannot be assumed. It must be built, and evidenced.

Trust has to be earned through control

Firms need to answer some difficult questions:

• Do you have clear boundaries on what an AI agent is allowed to do?
• Can you monitor its actions in real time?
• Are decisions fully explainable after the fact?
• Is accountability clearly assigned at a senior level?

For many firms, the honest answer is not yet.

That does not mean organisations should stop investing in agentic IA. It does mean they need to be more disciplined about how authority is granted.

A useful way to think about this is progressive trust. Start with constrained use cases. Limit the scope, maintain strong human oversight and then expand authority only as control mechanisms prove effective.

Too many firms are doing the opposite, expanding capability first and retrofitting governance later. That approach will not stand up to regulatory scrutiny.

There is also a cultural dimension. Senior leaders must be comfortable challenging not just the technology but the assumptions behind it. Efficiency gains should not come at the expense of control, accountability, or customer outcomes.

Ultimately, this is a leadership issue.

Because trusting AI agents with real authority is not about what the technology can do. It’s about whether your organisation is prepared to stand behind what it does.

And right now, many aren’t as ready as they think.

What does this mean for you and your firm?

For asset managers and wealth managers, this question goes to the heart of fiduciary responsibility and client trust. Granting AI agents more authority could improve responsiveness and efficiency, but only if firms can show that portfolio decisions, client interactions, and operational actions remain within clear limits and are subject to meaningful oversight.

How Ruleguard helps firms:

Ruleguard can help firms take a more disciplined approach to AI authority by supporting clear limits, stronger oversight, and better evidence of control as autonomy increases. That allows organisations to build trust progressively and demonstrate that governance is keeping pace with capability.

Ruleguard helps firms take a more disciplined approach to AI authority: accountability regime tools to assign clear senior ownership, compliance monitoring software to evidence that oversight is actually working, and operational risk management to keep governance keeping pace as autonomy grows.

Book a discovery call to see how ready your firm really is.

About the Author

In a career spanning 30 years, Priscilla has worked as a consultant, CCO and MLRO providing regulatory oversight and advice to firms across the financial services industry. She is responsible for our thought leadership programme, writing regular articles and white papers, and hosting webinars on a variety of regulatory matters.

 

She is a Fellow of the International Compliance Association, a certified GRC practitioner, and a member of the Institute of Risk Management. 

 

Contact Priscilla