Great to meet you @Alain Augsburger I'm interested to hear your perspectives on AI governance, especially as part of the Data Governance stack.

Thanks for the feedback. I agree that AI governance in many respects shouldn't be different from any other data or information governance principles. In the standards work I do, I see one common problem. Each standards committee is populated by specialists in their respective fields (records management as an example.) As experts, they know their field well but aren't necessarily versed in other related and potentially overlapping fields. ISO really does really try to create liaisons with participants from affected disciplines, but it is difficult to get participation and avoid professional ego. We created an initial ISO Information Governance standard but it was too high level, and really identified a set of principles. We now working on a more detailed part 2, which is more about implementation. At the same time (in another committee) we are working on AI implications for records management. The gap - ensuring that other discipline expectations and requirements are met, whilst not try to reinvent the wheel for every discipline that's out there. Another gap. Records management controls and requirements aren't well written into other IT Governance standards and frameworks.

@Anas Harnouch This is great, thanks. DMBok is comprehensive (as are all these frameworks), so this should be very useful.

@Anas Harnouch I know ISO standards are copyright protected, but any of the related ISO Standards, NIST, ITIL, COBIT etc..........

Welcome @Francesco Fragale Looking forward to hearing your insights.

@Anas Harnouch This is a major step forward. This ties in so closely with "integrated Information Governance" where all information-centric regulations (and corresponding internal policies) need to work together.