Independence and conflicts of interest
A standard is only as credible as the process behind it. This policy explains how the Board keeps standard-setting separate from commercial interest.
1. Sponsorship disclosure
All sponsors, and the share of funding each provides, will be published annually once the Board's not-for-profit entity is established.
2. Separation of standard-setting from funding
- Sponsors have no vote on standards, no seat on the Standards Board, and no right to review drafts before publication.
- From the third year, no single sponsor may provide more than 25% of annual funding.
- Trustees, not sponsors, appoint Standards Board members.
3. No vendor mandates
AIGS standards describe outcomes and evidence. They never name, require or favor a product, vendor or platform. The Board will not endorse products, certify vendors, or allow its name or marks to be used in marketing.
4. Disclosure of the founding drafts' origin
The founding exposure drafts were prepared by the Secretariat from practical control experience, including the founding sponsor's. Each basis for conclusions says so. This is why every draft goes through full public comment: any requirement that only one product can meet should be identified in a comment letter and will be redeliberated in public.
5. Conflicts of interest for individuals
- Board members, TWG chairs and Trustees file an annual declaration of interests, published on this site.
- Anyone who sells, or is paid to advise on, AI governance or AI security products is an Observer and may not vote or chair.
- A member with a conflict on a specific matter declares it and recuses from the vote.
6. Open process
Board meetings, exposure drafts, comment letters (where authors agree) and the basis for every decision are public.
7. Reporting concerns
Concerns about independence may be raised confidentially with the Trustees via the contact page.