An agent in your D365 environment approves an invoice, adjusts a forecast, or changes a customer record. Nobody typed the instruction. Six months later, a supplier disputes the charge, a regulator asks how the number was derived, or a customer claims a decision was made about them unfairly. The question arrives as simple, and it is not: who did that, and on what basis?
My work is reconstructing what a system did and deciding who is answerable for it, and enterprise Business Applications are increasingly where that question lands.
This session is about the accountability layer that autonomous agents in D365 require and that most deployments do not yet have. Where liability actually sits when an agent acts within delegated authority and gets it wrong. Why "a human approved it" is often not the defense leaders assume. What an agent's action record must contain to be usable when someone disputes it. Which approval and oversight designs hold up under scrutiny and which collapse. And how the contracts underneath your AI stack allocate risk you may not have priced.
Educational and vendor-neutral. No legal background required. Leaders leave with a framework for authorizing agent autonomy that survives the dispute rather than creating it.