Loading...
Decision Intelligence Architect, VP, Deputy General Counsel, Head of Global Business Integrity, Docusign.
About Me I work at the intersection of law, compliance, and decision design. As VP, Deputy General Counsel, and Head of Business Integrity at Docusign, I focus on a simple but often overlooked question: not whether organizations have good intentions, but whether their systems are designed to support good decisions in the moments that matter. My career has spanned public service and global companies, from the United Nations and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to leadership roles at Disney, Snap, Zendesk, and now Docusign. Across each of these environments, one pattern has remained consistent: breakdowns in integrity are rarely the result of bad actors. They are the result of decision environments that are not built for the scale, speed, or pressure of modern business. My work centers on closing that gap. I focus on building decision-useful compliance systems that help organizations move swiftly, safely, and strategically. This includes rethinking compliance as a navigation layer, designing for threshold moments where judgment matters most, and translating values into practical decision architecture that holds under pressure. I am the author of The Decision Intelligence Gap: From Intention to Execution Through Everyday Decisions and co-author of The Art of Implementation: For Culture Builders. My work explores how organizations can operationalize integrity, not as a principle, but as a system. I am particularly interested in how emerging technologies, including AI, can serve as partners in better decision-making, not just automation tools.
Compliance Navigator Compliance Navigator is an applied example of decision intelligence in practice. Organizations do not struggle with knowing what good decisions look like. They struggle with executing those decisions consistently under pressure, at speed, and at scale. This is the Decision Intelligence Gap. Compliance Navigator is designed to close that gap within the deal lifecycle. The system introduces a decision architecture that makes risk visible earlier and more usefully. It maps deals as dynamic pathways, identifies threshold moments where decisions begin to harden, and provides guidance that is actionable in context. Importantly, it shifts compliance from a retrospective function to a forward-looking one. Rather than identifying issues after they occur, it helps shape decisions before they become difficult to reverse. The platform also incorporates a feedback loop from frontline users, capturing real-world signals and continuously refining the system’s understanding of risk. In this way, Compliance Navigator moves compliance from principle to practice—embedding integrity directly into the flow of decision-making. In early testing, this approach reframes when and how risk is surfaced—shifting visibility from late-stage escalation to early-stage signal.
I believe integrity is not sustained by intention alone. It is sustained by design. Most organizations invest heavily in defining what is right, yet far less in shaping the conditions that make the right decision easier to execute. In practice, people do not rise to principles. They respond to the systems around them, especially under pressure, at speed, and at scale. My work focuses on building those systems. I approach compliance as a form of decision architecture. The goal is not control for its own sake, but clarity at the moments that matter. This means identifying threshold moments where decisions begin to harden, designing defaults that guide rather than constrain, and creating signals that are visible, timely, and decision-useful. I am equally focused on how these systems feel. A well-designed system should not burden the user. It should guide them. The best compliance experiences are intuitive, responsive, and almost invisible, offering the right insight at the right moment without friction. When design and experience come together, integrity becomes easier to execute, not harder to achieve.