Norm-shaping

Norm-shaping refers to the proactive process of influencing and establishing international norms and standards for AI, rather than merely complying with existing regulations. This concept originates from international relations theory, where 'norm-shapers' are actors capable of setting the agenda for emerging global practices. In the context of AI, this involves participating in international bodies like ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 42, the IEEE AI Ethos committee, or the OECD AI Principles. The goal is to ensure that emerging AI regulations align with the technology's practical capabilities and the organization's strategic interests. This is distinct from 'norm-taking,' where actors only respond to regulations after they are enacted. For enterprises, norm-shaping means having a seat at the table where AI ethics, safety, and transparency standards are defined, which directly impacts their ability to enter new markets and manage AI-related risks effectively.

Norm-shaping in AI risk management is applied through a three-stage strategic approach. First, companies must engage in 'norm-seeking' by participating in international standards-setting organizations (SSOs) like ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 42 or the AI Safety Institute (AISI)-led initiatives. This ensures their technical solutions are considered in the global regulatory baseline. Second, enterprises must implement an AI Management System (AIMS) based on ISO 42001, which provides a structured framework for AI risk assessment, risk-adjusted-by-design, and continuous monitoring. Third, companies must integrate AI ethics into their Enterprise Risk Management (ERM)--specifically focusing on AI-specific risks like model drift, bias, and adversarial attacks. Successful implementation can be measured by metrics such as AI compliance rate (target >90%), reduction in AI-related regulatory inquiries (target -50% year-on-year), and the speed of AI product deployment in regulated markets (target 25% faster than peers).

Taiwan enterprises face three primary challenges: resource constraints, geopolitical complexity, and regulatory uncertainty. AI standards-setting requires significant technical expertise and time, which many SMEs lack. Geopolitically, the AI governance landscape is fragmented between the US, EU, and China, making it difficult for Taiwan companies to be closely aligned with all jurisdictions simultaneously. Finally, the absence of a comprehensive AI law in Taiwan creates a vacuum for compliance guidance. To overcome these, companies should: 1) Adopt a 'global-first' compliance strategy, prioritizing ISO 42001 and the EU AI Act to ensure international interoperability. 2) Partner with industry associations to pool resources for international standards participation. 3) Invest in AI-specific risk-adjusted-by-design methodologies, ensuring AI systems are compliant by default rather than by retrofit. The priority should be establishing a 90-day foundation for AI governance before scaling up to full international influence.

Winners Consulting Services Co., Ltd. specializes in Norm-shaping for Taiwan enterprises, delivering compliant management systems within 90 days, with over 100 successful implementations. Free consultation: https://winners.com.tw/contact