AI Governance Assessment: How Mature Is Your Organization?

Our organization has a formally documented and approved AI governance policy.

Maps to ISO 42001 Clause 5 and NIST GOVERN. A documented policy is the foundation of all governance.

We have a clearly defined AI strategy that aligns AI initiatives with business objectives and regulatory requirements.

Strategy without governance compliance fails. Governance without business strategy is waste.

Roles and responsibilities for AI governance are formally assigned and resourced.

Maps to EU AI Act Art. 14 (human oversight). Without dedicated roles, governance is nobody's job.

We have a cross-functional AI oversight body that reviews AI use cases before deployment.

Maps to NIST GOVERN-1 and ISO 42001 Clause 9. Pre-deployment review prevents compliance violations.

Every AI system has a designated human accountable for its outcomes.

EU AI Act Art. 14 requires human oversight. Without accountability, incidents have no owner.

We maintain a complete inventory of all AI systems used across the organization.

You cannot govern what you cannot see. An AI system register is prerequisite for all compliance.

We conduct systematic risk assessments for all AI systems, classifying them by risk level.

Maps to EU AI Act Art. 9. Risk classification (minimal/limited/high/unacceptable) is mandatory.

We have processes to identify and mitigate AI-specific risks (bias, drift, hallucination).

AI risks differ from traditional IT risks. Bias and drift require continuous monitoring.

Third-party and vendor AI systems undergo the same governance scrutiny as internal AI.

Vendor AI creates the same risk as internal AI. Supply chain governance is often the weakest link.

We have mapped our AI systems against EU AI Act high-risk categories (Annex III).

Annex III mapping is step one of EU AI Act compliance. HR/employment AI is explicitly listed.

We maintain technical documentation that would satisfy regulatory audit requirements.

EU AI Act Art. 11 and Annex IV specify documentation requirements. Most organizations have gaps.

We have a defined process for reporting serious AI incidents to authorities.

Incident reporting is mandatory under EU AI Act. Having a tested process before an incident is critical.

Individuals affected by AI decisions are informed and can request human review.

Maps to EU AI Act Art. 13 (transparency) and GDPR Art. 22 (automated decisions).

We conduct fairness and bias audits on AI systems that affect people.

EU AI Act Art. 15 requires accuracy and robustness testing including bias monitoring.

Employees receive regular training on responsible AI use and governance expectations.

Training is the most effective governance enforcement mechanism. Without it, policies are paper.