# LinkedIn company page — every field, ready to paste

> Rendered from docs/marketing/linkedin-company-page.md in the repository. The text below is that file.
> Source: https://riskmandate.ai/admin/briefs/marketing--linkedin-company-page/ · noindex · written by scripts/site/build-admin.mjs

**Date:** 2026-09-12 · **Author:** @website-agent
**For:** creating `linkedin.com/company/riskmandate`
**Assets:** rendered by `scripts/site/render-brand-exports.mjs`, served from the site

Copy the values. Where a field needs a judgement call rather than a fact, the
recommendation is first and the reasoning is one line under it.

---

## Screen 1 — company details

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| **Name** | `RiskMandate` |
| **linkedin.com/company/** | `riskmandate` |
| **Website** | `https://riskmandate.ai` |
| **Industry** | **Computer and Network Security** |
| **Organization size** | **2–10 employees** |
| **Organization type** | **Privately held** |
| **Logo** | [`riskmandate-mark-300.png`](https://riskmandate.ai/assets/brand/riskmandate-mark-300.png) — 300×300, transparent |
| **Tagline** | `The insurability layer for AI agents — what they can reach, who owns it, and the record an underwriter accepts.` (111 of 120) |

**Industry.** LinkedIn allows one, and it drives who gets shown the page. *Computer
and Network Security* reaches the buyer who asks the agent questions. *Software
Development* is more literally true of what we ship and reaches nobody useful. Take
the buyer.

**Size.** Pick the honest bracket. LinkedIn shows it publicly and an investor reads
it; 2–10 reads as an early team, 0–1 reads as a side project and closes doors that
are not worth closing over a bracket.

**Tagline.** 111 of the 120 characters. The short alternative is just
`The insurability layer for AI agents.` (37) — cleaner, but the tagline is the only
line that shows under the name in search results and in the follow prompt, so the
longer one earns its space. Either is defensible; do not use both in different places.

## Screen 2 — the About / Overview

Paste as one block. 1,276 characters of the 2,000 allowed.

> An AI agent's grant is not its mandate. The moment an agent runs it holds authority
> nobody scoped and nobody time-boxed — and that risk is already accepted, whether or
> not anyone signed for it.
>
> RiskMandate makes that explicit. It starts with an Agent Behaviour Policy: a written
> description, for one agent in one deployment, of everything it can do, what it was
> authorised to do, the gap between the two, and what actually stands in the way. The
> policy describes and does not judge, so it carries no score.
>
> Above it, RiskMandate models the environment the agent is really in, and converts the
> standing grant into an acceptance with a named owner, a direction and an expiry —
> underwritten upward to the board. There is no deny button: a live risk cannot be
> refused, only accepted for an interval.
>
> The result is an Insurability Index: a computed score against a real conformance
> standard rather than a self-assessment. It answers the agent questions now appearing
> in enterprise security reviews, insurance submissions and investor diligence.
>
> Built on zero-knowledge encrypted vaults — your register stays yours, and can be
> handed to an auditor with a single read key. Read-only, and never in the request path.
>
> Six live demos, the model, and its data as JSON: riskmandate.ai

## Screen 3 — specialties and location

**Specialties** (LinkedIn takes up to 20; these are the ones people search):

```
AI governance · AI risk management · agentic AI · AI agents · agent security
risk acceptance · cyber risk quantification · GRC · insurability · AI insurance
third-party risk · security posture · EU AI Act · ISO 42001 · zero-knowledge
```

⚠️ **Drop `ISO 42001` if you want to be strict.** The standards bodies prohibit
adaptation and commercial exploitation of their text, and our own disclosure rule keeps
the language of conformity marking off our surfaces. A specialty keyword is not a
conformity claim, so it is probably fine — but "probably" is the same standard we
refused to publish the AIUC-1 key on, so the consistent answer is to drop it.

**Location.** Needs your input — LinkedIn wants a real address or at least a city, and
I am not going to invent one. Whatever goes here should match anything on the
exhibitor listing and any future companies-house record.

## Screen 4 — the cover image

[`riskmandate-linkedin-cover-1128x191.png`](https://riskmandate.ai/assets/brand/riskmandate-linkedin-cover-1128x191.png)
— 1128×191, the lockup on ink, left-padded by 300px so the logo tile LinkedIn overlays
on the bottom-left does not sit on the wordmark.

## First posts, if you want them ready

Three, in order. Each one is a fact plus a link, which is the only kind of post worth
making from a page with no followers yet.

1. **The page exists, and here is the argument.**
   > You know what you asked your agent to do. You almost certainly do not know what it
   > can do. An Agent Behaviour Policy is the document that puts both on the same page —
   > the grant, the mandate, the gap, and what is actually standing in the way. It
   > carries no score, because the same policy is dangerous in one deployment and
   > harmless in another. → riskmandate.ai/abp.html

2. **The one-setting example.** The strongest thing we own for a technical reader:
   same product, same machine, same account, confirmations on versus off — one barrier
   moved and not one number changed. → `riskmandate.ai/abp.html`

3. **Lisbon.** 17–18 September, Startup Summit, Unicorn Factory Lisboa. Bring one agent
   you already run. → `riskmandate.ai/summit.html`

## What not to put on the page

Same rules as every other surface, and LinkedIn is where they get broken first.

- No **score, rating or risk level** attached to an Agent Behaviour Policy.
- Never **"ADP"** — it is a registered mark of a payroll processor in every relevant
  class. The acronym is ABP, spelled out at first use.
- Never **"the policy"** as shorthand for the ABP: *policy* is the insurance instrument
  in our own Licence to Operate demo.
- No **"certified"**, **"compliant"**, **"conformant"** or **"accredited"**, and nothing
  that reads as a conformity mark.
- No claim that we are an **insurer, broker or MGA**, or that we place cover.
- No **verdict about a named competitor, vendor or standards body** — the record, never
  the judgement.