What is adversarial governance diagnostics?

Adversarial governance diagnostics is red-team testing of institutional policies, documentation chains, and workflow systems to identify defensibility risks before external scrutiny. Unlike traditional compliance audits that verify policy adherence, we model how external actors—activists, journalists, regulatory complainants, or adversarial litigants—could lawfully exploit procedural gaps to trigger disclosure, delay, or regulatory escalation. We apply the same tactics used in 30 years of accountability campaigns, now used defensively to help organizations harden their governance systems before crisis.

How is this different from a compliance audit?

Traditional compliance audits check whether policies exist and are being followed. Adversarial governance diagnostics test whether those policies survive external pressure. Compliance audits assume good-faith interpretation. We model bad-faith exploitation. For example: a compliance audit verifies you have a records retention policy. We test whether that policy creates disclosure obligations when hit with targeted public records requests. Compliance focuses on certification. We focus on defensibility under adversarial conditions.

Who typically engages REVOLT for adversarial diagnostics?

Our clients are primarily law firms representing municipal or institutional clients, public affairs agencies managing politically sensitive campaigns, compliance consultancies needing an adversarial perspective, and government contractors facing regulatory oversight. We work either directly with organizations or through counsel to preserve attorney-client privilege. Common scenarios include: pre-litigation risk assessment, preparing for anticipated scrutiny, hardening governance systems after near-miss incidents, or providing second-opinion review of existing compliance frameworks.

What deliverables do we receive?

Every engagement includes three core deliverables: (1) Confidential Exposure Memo identifying specific governance gaps exploitable by external actors, with concrete exploit scenarios based on real-world tactics; (2) Risk Prioritization Matrix ranking vulnerabilities by severity, likelihood, and remediation complexity; (3) Mitigation Recommendations providing actionable steps to harden systems before external pressure arrives. All work product can be structured through counsel to preserve attorney-client privilege and work-product protections.

How long does an engagement typically take?

Engagement timelines vary by scope. Our External Pressure Test (rapid threat assessment) runs 10-14 days from kickoff to final briefing. The Regulatory & Media Exposure Audit (comprehensive review) takes 30 days. Adversarial Advisor Retainers are ongoing monthly arrangements. Initial scoping calls typically take 30-60 minutes and can be arranged within 48 hours for urgent situations. We work on your timeline—some engagements require rapid turnaround before a known escalation window.

Can this work be protected under attorney-client privilege?

Yes. All engagements can be structured through outside counsel or in-house legal to preserve attorney-client privilege and work-product protections. This is critical when dealing with sensitive governance vulnerabilities you don't want discoverable. We have standard engagement structures designed for privilege protection and work regularly with law firms on exactly this basis. If you're counsel to an organization, we can function as your adversarial subject matter expert. If you're an organization, we can be engaged through your legal team.

What's included in the External Pressure Test?

The External Pressure Test is a 10-14 day rapid assessment focused on immediate vulnerabilities. We review your documentation systems, authority chains, and enforcement mechanisms through an adversarial lens. This includes: mapping public records exposure, identifying regulatory complaint tripwires, testing procedural resilience under malicious compliance scenarios, and modeling narrative attack surfaces. You receive a prioritized threat assessment with specific exploit scenarios and immediate mitigation steps. This is ideal for organizations facing near-term scrutiny or wanting a quick defensibility check.

Do you work directly with organizations or only through counsel?

We work both ways, depending on client needs and privilege considerations. Many clients engage us directly when privilege isn't a concern or when they're conducting general governance improvements. Others—particularly those anticipating litigation, regulatory action, or sensitive political pressure—engage us through counsel to ensure all findings remain privileged. Law firms also engage us as subject matter experts on specific matters. We're flexible on engagement structure and can advise on the best approach for your situation during initial scoping.