The Problem: AI risk isn't just technical; it’s behavioral. Even "perfect" models create risk when human reliance shifts or fails under pressure.
The Mission: To turn Behavioral AI Risk from a vague concern into a measurable, governable data point.
The Method: Moving beyond guesswork to treat AI reliance as a risk scenario that can be stress-tested.
The Toolkit: A free, framework-first approach to identifying behavioral signals and designing smart governance.
Most AI conversations focus on the model: Is it fast? Is it accurate? Is it biased?
But as organizations move AI into real-world workflows, a different risk emerges. It’s not about how the AI works—it’s about how we work with it.
When we rely on AI, our behavior changes. We might start "rubber-stamping" its outputs under pressure, or stop using it entirely after it makes a single mistake.
This is Behavioral AI Risk. It’s the invisible gap between how a system is supposed to work and how humans actually use it. If you aren't measuring this gap, you aren't truly governing your AI.
I founded Tiny Designer in 2024 to solve a problem that was being ignored: the way we interact with and use AI matters. With a background in human centred design and AI, I saw that whilst we were getting better at building working models, nobody was paying attention to what we do with them.
AI adoption is more than just technical performance and basic training. It’s about how our behavior shifts when we collaborate with these systems.
We urgently need a way to acknowledge the behavioural side of AI. By making these hidden risks visible, and finding a way to work together to solve them, I hope we can create a world where AI is safer, and more effective.
The goal is to make the "behavioral stress test" available to everyone. Before you can govern AI, you have to understand how it is being used. Our free toolkit helps you:
Measure Reliance: See how AI is actually used in practice.
Identify Exposure: Spot where human-AI friction creates risk.
Define Tolerance: Build governance based on real behavioural limits, not guesswork