Alignment with other organizational policies

Establish where other organizational policies may be affected by, or may apply to, the organization's objectives for AI systems. In practice the record is analysis of intersections with quality, security, safety and privacy policies. Read it against alignment with other organizational policies at the next policy review.

What it asks

Establish where other organizational policies may be affected by, or may apply to, the organization's objectives for AI systems.

Where generative AI changes the answer

The conflict that matters is between the AI policy and the privacy, security and records policies, because a prompt can breach all three at once.

Who it binds

The AI management system owner and the policy approver. For A.2.3 the named role is the owner of analysis of intersections with quality, security, safety and privacy policies.

Evidence an auditor normally samples

• Analysis of intersections with quality, security, safety and privacy policies
• Updates made to other policies or provisions added to the AI policy

The test you can run

Compare analysis of intersections with quality, security, safety and privacy policies with the use as it runs today; the gap between the two is the finding to record.

Common failures

• AI policy conflicts with the privacy or security policy
• No analysis of intersecting policies

Before the draft publishes

For A.2.3, compare the current AI policy with what staff actually do with generative tools, and record every gap you find as a policy exception until it is fixed. The first artefact to produce is analysis of intersections with quality, security, safety and privacy policies.

Where this sits against the draft

The draft's published scope names controls for the risks it identifies, and A.2.3 (alignment with other organizational policies) is the published ISO/IEC 42001 control closest to that work. The draft does not replace it, and an audit still tests it against the evidence listed here.