Line 02 · LexMap 231Administrative liability of entities

The 231 model as a living structure.

LexMap 231 is not a management tool: it is an intelligent map of the system of risk, control, evidence and oversight. Processes, offence-risks, controls and evidence linked to the entity's real processes and to the supervisory body's work — with traceable controls that make the model more defensible.

§ The workspace
Interface preview · sample data
LexMap 231
Modello 231 — Acme Industriale S.p.A.
cerca processo o rischio
Modello 231
Processi sensibili14
Acquisti e fornitori
Rapporti con la P.A.
Salute e sicurezza
Rischi-reato28
Presidi e controlli36
Flussi informativi19
Evidenze52
Attività OdV11
Mappa processo → rischio → presidio
Processo sensibile
Acquisti e fornitori
rischio alto5 presidi
Rischio-reato
Corruzione · art. 25
Presidio
Procedura albo fornitori
Controllo
Doppia firma > €50k
Presidio carente
Nessun controllo a valle
Evidenza
Verbale OdV Q1
Dettaglio presidio
Presidio carente

Il rischio di corruzione nel processo acquisti è coperto a monte dall'albo fornitori, ma manca un controllo a valle sull'esecuzione contrattuale e sui pagamenti.

Estratto modello · §4.2

«…il processo è presidiato dalla procedura di qualifica fornitori, fermo restando il monitoraggio periodico…»

ProcessoAcquisti e fornitori
RischioCorruzione · art. 25
EsposizioneResidua alta

§ Administration and substance

Not a 231 management tool: an intelligent map that answers the questions of substance.

A management tool keeps processes, controls and evidence in order: it answers questions of administration. LexMap 231 links the same elements, so you can ask where the entity is really exposed, whether that risk is covered by an effective control and whether the control leaves verifiable evidence — the questions of substance that hold up a defensible model.

Questions of administration
  • Which processes and controls are catalogued in the model?
  • Is the model up to date, complete and filed?
  • Are the documents retrievable when needed?
Questions of substanceQuestions of administration → Questions of substance
Questions of substance
  • Where is the entity really exposed?
  • Is this risk covered by an effective control?
  • Does the control leave verifiable evidence?

Where it serves, in practice

  • 01

    Supervisory body's monitoring plan

    The body sees at once where to focus controls: risks without an effective control, already highlighted.

  • 02

    Post-event response

    After a report, trace from the fact back to the process, the control and the missing evidence.

  • 03

    M&A due diligence

    Assess the integrity of a partner's or target's model before integrating it.

Download the full manifesto (PDF)The full model of the reading levels, in the CM Cube manifesto.

§ What makes it verifiable

Where the organisation is really exposed.

→ Processes

Linked to the entity's real processes, not an abstract map.

→ Offence-risks

Each risk linked to the process that generates it.

→ Controls

Controls mapped onto the risk they cover.

→ Evidence

Available evidence attached to controls and anomalies.

→ Supervisory work

More effective tools for the oversight bodies.

Not declarative — a model linked to the facts strengthens risk governance and the entity's position.

§ The method

Reading · Structuring · Navigation · Verification

We map your 231 model onto real processes.

We start from your model and existing delegations: you'll see where risks, controls and evidence connect — and where they don't.