Figure 1.
The conceptual model places Governance-Practice Gap at the top, defined as misalignment between formal rules and practice. Micro-Level Practices represents everyday A I use, including experimentation, workarounds, and adaptation. Meso-Level Governance represents organisational control mechanisms, including policies, oversight, training, and technical controls. An upper connection from micro-level practices to meso-level governance is labelled Use triggers adaptation. A lower reciprocal connection from meso-level governance to micro-level practices is labelled Controls shape use. A further curved connection links the governance-practice gap with the micro-level and meso-level elements. Dynamic Alignment appears below these elements and represents responsible A I in practice, including accountability, transparency, and managed risk. The Public Sector Context forms the base and includes legitimacy, public value, and democratic accountability. Upward connections from the public sector context lead to Dynamic Alignment and Meso-Level Governance. Both are associated with normative pressure involving legitimacy, accountability, and public value.A socio-technical model of AI governance as dynamic alignment between practice and control