GAICC AI Conference & Awards 2026 "Governing the Future – Building Responsible, Safe and Human-centric AI"
Although they are both ISO management system standards (MSS), the ISO/IEC 42001 vs ISO/IEC 27001 debate can be interesting. The ISO/IEC 42001 is the first worldwide Artificial Intelligence Management System (AIMS) standard, which helps guide enterprises in implementing risk management and AI governance strategies across the AI lifecycle.
The ISO/IEC 27001, on the other hand, is a well-known Information Security Management System that focuses on safeguarding data availability, confidentiality, and integrity against cyber and privacy risks.
There is no doubt that both standards look into risk-based methodologies and adhere to ISO’s high-level framework. However, even with this significant similarity, there are differences when it comes to their target audiences, controls, and scopes.
The ISO/IEC 42001:2023 is a relatively new international standard that outlines specifications for an Artificial Intelligence Management System. The main aim of this standard is to establish policies and objectives, and processes to achieve responsible development, provision, or use of AI systems.
In simpler terms, ISO 42001 assists companies in creating guidelines, practices, and controls related to their AI initiatives to guarantee accountability, morality, and transparency.
Some of the main components of ISO/IEC 42001 include:
The standard oversees every single stage, right from the conception and design of AI systems to their retirement. The standard, apart from offering a framework for internal governance and risk management, also helps address certain unique challenges AI poses, such as ethical considerations, transparency, and continual learning.
If you’re planning to get certified as a Lead Implementer, our GAICC ISO/IEC 42001 Lead Implementer Certification Guide explains the exam structure, eligibility, and preparation process in detail.
The ISO/IEC 27001 is an international standard for an Information Security Management System (ISMS). The main aim of this standard is to assist enterprises in safeguarding information assets from cybersecurity risks and data breaches. The standard has been accepted globally with more than 70,000 certificates in 150 countries.
The standard:
The bottom line here is that the standard assists businesses in raising risk awareness and integrating information security into every aspect of their operations.
An extensive list of security measures is listed in Annex A of ISO/IEC 27001. This includes:
The standard also establishes a management system to safeguard information, which further requires a risk management procedure that guarantees the confidentiality, availability, and integrity of data. What this mainly includes is putting certain security procedures in place to reduce risks like cyberattacks and data breaches.
The scope, risk emphasis, control sets, industries, and typical responsibilities of both standards are different. Here is a look at the major ISO 42001 vs ISO 27001 differences:
Scope:
Organizations that utilize, develop, or supply AI systems are the target audience for ISO/IEC 42001. The standard is used to regulate the management of AI in goods and services, like in a manufacturing company utilizing AI in quality control or a software company that creates apps that are AI-driven.
The ISO/IEC 27001, on the other hand, can be used by companies of any size and sector that deal with information security. The main aim of such companies, whilst implementing the standard, is to safeguard data in every situation, including financial records and consumer information.
Basically, the scope of 27001 is information security, while the scope of 42001 is AI governance.
Core Risk Focus:
The main focus of ISO/IEC 42001 is AI-specific risks. This includes:
In contrast, ISO/IEC 27001 concentrates on basic cybersecurity and data protection threats. It highlights the triad that the CIA concentrates on:
Basically, while 42001 addresses risks associated with the implementation of AI, 27001 covers risks like malware, hacks, data theft, etc.
Annex Controls:
In both standards, the frameworks for control are different. A list of suggested AI governance controls is included in ISO/IEC 42001’s Annex A, which serves as a management guide for AI development.
Annex B talks about implementation guidelines for those controls. These controls include, but are not limited to:
In comparison, a full collection of approximately 93 security controls spanning domains, including organizational controls, people controls, physical controls, and technology controls, may be found in ISO/IEC 27001’s Annex A.
These include:
Industries:
Where AI is used in industries, the use of ISO/IEC 42001 is non-negotiable. Industries that use AI extensively, such as tech/software firms, healthcare, finance, manufacturing, etc, are expected to adopt it.
In contrast, ISO/IEC 27001 is already in use in every industry. Manufacturing, banking, government, healthcare, and many other industries have adopted it, but IT and tech are where it is most widely used.
Roles:
AI governance managers, data scientists with an emphasis on governance, AI ethicists, AI project leads, and AI-focused internal auditors are likely to be involved in ISO/IEC 42001.
Such experts will understand the ethical issues and AI models better. Some roles, in this context, include:
These positions concentrate on network security, policy enforcement, and IT security.
The management system approaches of ISO/IEC 42001 and ISO/IEC 27001 significantly overlap, despite their differing fields. Both are ISO management system standards (MSS), and they have similar fundamental components:
Management System Structure
Both standards adhere to the ISO High-Level Structure for management systems. This means that they employ the Plan–Do–Check–Act or PDCA cycle with the same clause structure. The clauses in such cases include:
Organizations can more readily install and integrate both systems as a result of this shared framework.
Risk-Based Thinking:
Both standards emphasize adopting a risk-based strategy. Each of them needs to identify and evaluate obvious risks within its area. In ISO/IEC 27001, risk assessment of information security threats and vulnerabilities is required.
On the other hand, ISO/IEC 42001 specifically requires AI risk and impact evaluations in planning, citing complementary risk management frameworks such as ISO 31000. The main goal in both situations is to methodically identify risks that are unacceptable, whether they are connected to cybersecurity or artificial intelligence, and to establish controls or mitigation strategies.
Integration of Controls:
A single management system can incorporate both the standards. When it comes to ISO/IEC 42001, the main purpose is to supplement current standards. Organizations can really align their ISMS and AIMS by sharing common components such as audits, control documents, and processes for continuous improvement.
The bottom line here is that both standards use ISO’s high-level management structure and risk-based planning. They both view compliance and governance as management responsibilities, linking leadership commitment and documented processes. What this, at the end of the day, means is that an organization with an ISO 27001 system can often adapt it for ISO 42001 or vice versa.
An organization’s priorities determine whether to implement ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 42001, or both.
Use ISO/IEC 27001 if:
Use ISO/IEC 42001 if:
Use both together if:
It is important to understand that the decision to use a particular standard may be influenced by compliance requirements in certain sectors or jurisdictions.
The two standards, ISO 42001 vs ISO 27001, also open different career paths and certifications:
To understand the specific roles, responsibilities, and skills involved in these emerging positions, explore our detailed guide on the ISO/IEC 42001 Lead Implementer Career Path.
Adding ISO/IEC 42001 is not required if your company is already ISO/IEC 27001-certified, but it can be very helpful if AI plays a significant role in your operations. The two certificates are complementary to one another:
As GAICC, or the Global AI Certification Council, is an ISO-authorized AI training and certification authority, it offers structured training courses to help professionals prepare for ISO/IEC 42001 certification:
To put it briefly, GAICC offers a guided route from classroom instruction to formal certification. Professionals can successfully apply AIMS in their organizations and obtain a globally recognized certification by enrolling in GAICC’s ISO 42001 courses.
Yes. Organizations can pursue certification for both standards simultaneously.
Of course. Learning ISO 42001 does not require any formal prerequisites. Professionals with backgrounds in risk management, data science, AI, or compliance can study it on their own.
Although they serve different career routes, both are valuable. For many years, ISO 27001 has been in high demand and is still well-regarded in all cybersecurity-related industries. The demand for ISO 42001 is rising, particularly as more businesses use AI.
Both certifications show a dedication to best practices and professional expertise. Your proficiency in cybersecurity management is demonstrated by an ISO 27001 certification. Your grasp of responsible AI governance is demonstrated by your ISO 42001 certification.
The range of training and certification expenses for ISO 27001 and ISO 42001 is generally comparable. Both usually entail an exam fee in addition to a few training days.
A globally certified instructor in ISO/IEC, PMI®, TOGAF®, SAFe®, and Scrum.org disciplines. With over three years’ hands-on experience in ISO/IEC 42001 AI governance, he delivers training and consulting across New Zealand, Australia, Malaysia, the Philippines, and the UAE, combining high-end credentials with practical, real-world expertise and global reach.
