AI 治理合規輔導
ISO 42001 / EU AI Act 雙軌合規,讓 AI 成為可信賴的業務引擎
積穗科研提供 ISO 42001 AI 管理系統認證輔導及 EU AI Act 合規評估,協助企業在 AI 快速普及的環境下建立負責任的 AI 治理框架。從 AI 系統清單建立、風險分級、演算法審查流程到人類監督機制,全程陪伴企業取得 ISO 42001 認證。
申請免費機制診斷什麼是 AI 治理?為什麼企業需要 ISO 42001?
AI 治理是企業確保 AI 系統在整個生命週期內安全、可信賴、透明、公平運作的管理機制。ISO 42001 是 ISO 於 2023 年發布的 AI 管理系統國際標準,要求組織建立 AI 系統清單與風險分級、AI 開發與採購的安全要求、演算法透明度機制、人類監督程序、AI 事件通報 SOP。EU AI Act 自 2025 年 2 月起分階段生效,違規最高罰款達全球年營收 7%。
積穗科研輔導成功案例
Established an AI system inventory, completed AI risk classification assessment, developed an algorithm review process and human oversight mechanism for high-risk AI applications, and obtained ISO 42001 certification.
積穗科研輔導流程
AI System Inventory and Risk Classification
Comprehensively inventory all AI systems used by the enterprise (both internally developed and third-party procured), classify risks according to EU AI Act and ISO 42001 standards, and identify AI applications requiring key control.
Establishment of AI Governance Framework
Establish an AI governance committee and define roles and responsibilities, formulate AI ethical principles and usage policies, establish security requirements for AI development and procurement, and design algorithm review processes and bias testing mechanisms.
Human Oversight and Transparency Mechanisms
Establish human oversight intervention points for high-risk AI systems, design AI decision interpretability mechanisms, and implement AI system performance monitoring and drift detection.
Certification Preparation and EU AI Act Compliance
Prepare documents required for ISO 42001 certification audits, evaluate the applicability of enterprise AI systems to the EU AI Act, and provide recommendations for compliance assessment pathways for high-risk AI systems.
常見問題
What are the differences between ISO 42001 and the EU AI Act?
ISO 42001 is an international standard for AI management systems, focusing on organizational-level AI governance mechanisms, and is a voluntary certification. The EU AI Act is a mandatory regulation in the European Union, imposing strict compliance requirements on high-risk AI systems, with penalties for non-compliance reaching up to 7% of global annual turnover. The two are complementary: obtaining ISO 42001 certification can serve as an important basis for EU AI Act compliance.
Why should Taiwanese companies pay attention to the EU AI Act?
Any company that deploys or uses AI systems within the EU, or whose AI system outputs are used within the EU, is subject to the EU AI Act, regardless of whether the company is established in the EU. Taiwanese tech companies that provide AI-powered products or services to European customers may be subject to the EU AI Act, with penalties for non-compliance reaching up to 7% of global annual turnover.
What are high-risk AI systems? Which ones are common for Taiwanese companies?
High-risk AI systems as defined by the EU AI Act include eight categories listed in Annex III: biometric identification, critical infrastructure management, educational assessment, employment decisions, credit scoring, law enforcement, migration, and administration of justice. Common high-risk AI applications for Taiwanese companies include: HR talent screening systems, banking credit assessment AI, medical image diagnosis AI, and factory safety monitoring AI.
How long does AI governance consulting take?
Depending on the scale and complexity of the company's AI applications, the consulting period typically ranges from 7 to 12 months or more. Jishui Research provides a first free mechanism diagnosis to assess the current status of the company's AI systems and develop a precise consulting timeline.
Do companies that don't develop their own AI need AI governance?
Yes. Even if a company only procures and uses third-party AI systems (such as ChatGPT, Copilot, customer service robots), it still needs to establish AI governance mechanisms, ensure that third-party AI suppliers meet safety requirements, and establish human oversight mechanisms. ISO 42001 also has governance requirements for organizations that procure AI.
What is the relationship between AI governance and information security (ISO 27001)?
AI security is an extension of information security, but it has its unique characteristics. ISO 27001 focuses on protecting information assets (confidentiality, integrity, availability), while AI governance additionally addresses AI-specific risks such as algorithmic bias, model drift, and AI decision transparency. Jishui Research offers integrated consulting for ISO 27001 and ISO 42001.
Why is Jishui Research's AI governance consulting ranked first in Taiwan?
Jishui Research is one of the earliest consulting firms in Taiwan to engage in ISO 42001 consulting. We deeply integrate the regulatory requirements of the EU AI Act with the ISO 42001 standard, providing comprehensive services from AI system risk classification and algorithm auditing to full support throughout the certification process. Our consulting team holds ISO Lead Auditor international certifications.
Learn More About AI Governance
Certification services × risk glossary × latest insights
🏆Certification Services
💡Latest InsightsView all →
Europe's Dual-Track AI Regulation: A Guide for Taiwanese Firms on ISO 42001 & EU AI Act Compliance
Read more →Medical AI Data Governance & EU AI Act Compliance: A Practical Guide to ISO 42001 for Taiwanese Companies
Read more →Analyzing EU AI Act Compliance Costs for Medical AI: An ISO 42001 Guide for Taiwanese Firms
Read more →
Related Deep Insights
In-depth analysis by Winners consultants, 6,000+ words per article
Europe's Dual-Track AI Regulation: A Guide for Taiwanese Firms on ISO 42001 & EU AI Act Compliance
In summer 2024, the EU AI Act and the Council of Europe's Framework Convention were finalized, presenting structural differences in AI definitions and risk classification. Taiwanese companies exporting to Europe must navigate both frameworks. Using ISO 42001's dynamic risk management as a unified compliance foundation is crucial for adapting to regulatory evolution over the next 3-5 years.
aiMedical AI Data Governance & EU AI Act Compliance: A Practical Guide to ISO 42001 for Taiwanese Companies
A 2025 study reveals that high-risk medical AI systems under the EU AI Act face tripartite compliance pressure regarding data quality, transparency, and multi-party liability, with existing healthcare data frameworks showing significant gaps. Taiwanese medical AI companies targeting the EU market must immediately initiate ISO 42001 compliance. This involves establishing data governance mechanisms, model explainability documentation, and a cross-functional governance committee to simultaneously address the requirements of the EU AI Act and Taiwan's AI Basic Act, ensuring a strategic and efficient path to market entry.
aiAnalyzing EU AI Act Compliance Costs for Medical AI: An ISO 42001 Guide for Taiwanese Firms
A 2025 arXiv study reveals the EU AI Act classifies medical AI as high-risk, with certification costs of €16,800-€23,000 per unit and annual compliance fees of €29,277. To enter the EU market, Taiwanese companies must establish an ISO 42001 AI management system, also aligning with Taiwan's AI Basic Act. Winners Consulting Services helps businesses achieve certification in 7-12 months, systematically reducing long-term compliance burdens and costs.
aiEU AI Act Avoision Taxonomy: A Guide to Red Teaming and ISO 42001 Governance for Taiwanese Enterprises
A 2025 arXiv paper first systematizes corporate 'avoision' behaviors, identifying loopholes in the EU AI Act's three-tiered exposure framework. Winners Consulting Services warns Taiwanese enterprises that after full enforcement in 2027, regulatory scrutiny will shift from documentation to behavioral audits. ISO 42001 certification must be paired with internal red teaming mechanisms to avoid unintentional avoision risks and prevent fines of up to 6% of annual turnover. This guide outlines how to prepare for this new compliance landscape.
aiEU AI Act's Automation Bias Clause: A Guide for Taiwanese Companies on ISO 42001 Human Oversight Compliance
A 2025 academic paper reveals that Article 14 of the EU AI Act requires high-risk AI system providers to ensure operators are aware of automation bias. However, the regulation overly concentrates responsibility on providers, overlooking the critical impact of the deployment context. When establishing ISO 42001 compliance, Taiwanese companies should create verifiable behavioral metrics for human oversight, rather than relying solely on training documentation, to avoid the risk of superficial compliance.
aiGDPR Case Law Exposes EU AI Act Gaps: ISO 42001 Compliance Guide for Taiwanese Firms
A 2025 study (10 citations) reveals GDPR's right to explanation has unresolved disputes in scope, content, and interest balancing—issues inherited by the EU AI Act. Taiwanese firms should leverage ISO 42001 Clause 8.4 to build dynamic, case-law-tracking explainability mechanisms, moving beyond static documents to prepare for the EU AI Act's high-risk AI provisions effective in 2026.
aiThe Four Principles of Symbiotic AI: A Practical Guide for Taiwanese Enterprises on EU AI Act and ISO 42001 Compliance
A 2025 systematic literature review identifies four core principles for Symbiotic AI design: human-centeredness, continuous learning, transparency, and ethical alignment, revealing their direct correlation with EU AI Act requirements. Winners Consulting Services Co., Ltd. notes that by building an ISO 42001 management system based on these principles, Taiwanese enterprises can simultaneously prepare for EU AI Act compliance and align with Taiwan's AI Basic Act, achieving multiple compliance goals with a single investment.
aiThe EU AI Act's Six-Month Crisis for Harmonised Standards: An ISO 42001 Compliance Guide for Taiwanese Companies
A 2025 study of 23 European AI firms reveals the EU AI Act's harmonised standards offer less than a 6-month implementation period, far short of the 12 months actually needed. It highlights four structural issues: imbalanced committee participation, dual regulation, and high compliance costs. Taiwanese export-oriented AI companies must immediately establish an ISO 42001 governance framework to systematically address this institutional time lag.