Compliance - Score assessment
Scoring the assessment period: Lex proposes evidence-backed scores for you to approve, you rate everything else directly, and the two kinds of score stay distinguishable afterwards.
Score the assessment period. Every requirement ends up with a score either way — the difference is where that score comes from.
Typical workflow
Where evidence exists, Lex proposes a score
Where a requirement has real evidence behind it, Lex proposes a score, cites the evidence it's based on, and explains its reasoning. You approve, adjust or reject the proposal — Lex never applies a score on its own.
Where there's no evidence, rate it yourself
A quick, direct pass
Where nothing's linked yet, you get a tap-to-rate grid instead of a proposal to review — a fast, one-tap-per-control way to record your own call. Lex's evidence-backed proposals only ever cover what it has something to cite; everything else is yours to rate directly.
The two kinds of score stay distinguishable
Easy to miss
A tap-to-rate score is recorded as claimed; an evidence-backed one is validated. The two are kept as clearly separate states, not just a shared number, with a full record of who set it, when and why — which matters the day someone challenges one.
Compliance - Gather evidence
Getting evidence attached to requirements: what counts as done, what's already covered without you chasing it, and what still needs a person to produce and approve it.
Compliance - Reporting
Reporting the trajectory upward: the Executive Overview pulls risk register, work in progress and compliance coverage into one document, and approving a new target maturity sets the standing goal until it's changed.