AI Governance Charter Template: Documenting Your Approach

You have AI policies. You have an AI committee. You have risk registers and approval processes. But is it documented in a way that provides clear organizational authority and accountability?

An AI governance charter formalizes your approach—creating the authoritative document that establishes how your organization governs AI. This guide provides a comprehensive template with section-by-section guidance.

Executive Summary

• A governance charter establishes formal authority for AI oversight—it's not just another policy document
• Charters define scope, principles, structure, and accountability in a single authoritative reference
• Board or executive approval gives the charter weight—it becomes organizational mandate, not departmental initiative
• Charters should be stable but not static—annual review with defined amendment process
• Completeness matters, but so does usability—balance comprehensiveness with practical accessibility
• A charter without operationalization is theater—link charter provisions to operational processes
• This template is a starting point—customize for your organization's context and maturity

Why This Matters Now

Organizations need formal governance structures for AI:

Regulatory expectations. Singapore's Model AI Governance Framework, ISO/IEC 42001, and emerging regulations expect documented governance. Informal approaches don't satisfy auditors or regulators.

Organizational clarity. Without a charter, AI governance happens inconsistently—or not at all. Clear authority prevents gaps and conflicts.

Board accountability. Directors are increasingly asked about AI oversight. A charter demonstrates deliberate governance.

Stakeholder confidence. Customers, partners, and employees want to know how you govern AI. A charter provides the answer.

AI Governance Charter Template

Section 1: Purpose and Authority

1.1 Purpose

This AI Governance Charter establishes the framework for the governance of artificial intelligence systems within [Organization Name]. It defines principles, structures, roles, and processes for responsible AI development, deployment, and operation.

1.2 Authority

This Charter is approved by [the Board of Directors / Executive Committee] and represents organizational policy. All business units, departments, and personnel are bound by its provisions.

1.3 Effective Date and Review Cycle

• Effective Date: [Date]
• Last Reviewed: [Date]
• Next Review: [Date]
• Review Frequency: Annually, or upon significant regulatory or business change

Section 2: Scope

2.1 Definition of AI Systems

For purposes of this Charter, AI systems include:

• Machine learning models and applications
• Natural language processing systems
• Computer vision applications
• Robotic process automation with intelligent components
• Generative AI tools
• AI features embedded in third-party software
• Any system that makes or supports decisions using automated data analysis

2.2 Coverage

This Charter applies to:

• AI systems developed internally
• AI systems procured from third parties
• AI features within existing software platforms
• Proof-of-concept and pilot AI implementations
• AI research and experimentation

2.3 Exclusions

The following are outside scope:

• [Define any exclusions, e.g., personal use of AI tools, specific low-risk applications]

Section 3: Guiding Principles

3.1 Responsible AI Principles

[Organization Name] commits to the following principles in all AI activities:

3.1.1 Human Oversight AI systems support human decision-making rather than replace human judgment for consequential decisions. Appropriate human review and intervention mechanisms are maintained.

3.1.2 Fairness and Non-Discrimination AI systems are designed and operated to avoid unfair bias and discrimination. Regular assessment ensures equitable outcomes across protected groups.

3.1.3 Transparency AI operations are explainable to stakeholders at an appropriate level. Individuals affected by AI decisions have the right to understand how decisions are made.

3.1.4 Privacy and Data Protection AI systems comply with applicable data protection laws and organizational privacy policies. Data minimization and purpose limitation principles apply.

3.1.5 Security AI systems are protected against unauthorized access, manipulation, and adversarial attacks. Security controls are proportionate to system risk.

3.1.6 Accountability Clear ownership and accountability exists for all AI systems. Accountability cannot be delegated to algorithms.

3.1.7 Continuous Improvement AI systems are monitored for performance and compliance. Learnings from incidents and reviews drive improvement.

Section 4: Governance Structure

4.1 Board/Executive Oversight

[Board of Directors / Executive Committee] responsibilities:

• Approve this Charter and material amendments
• Set strategic direction for AI
• Review significant AI risks and incidents
• Approve high-risk AI deployments above defined thresholds
• Receive regular AI governance reports

4.2 AI Governance Committee

An AI Governance Committee is established with the following:

Composition:

• Chairperson: [Title, e.g., Chief Risk Officer]
• Members: [Titles, e.g., CTO, CLO, CISO, Chief Data Officer, Business Unit Representatives]
• Secretary: [Title]

Responsibilities:

• Develop and maintain AI policies
• Review and approve AI initiatives above defined thresholds
• Oversee AI risk management
• Review AI incidents and lessons learned
• Report to [Board/Executives] on AI governance matters
• Commission audits and assessments

Meeting Cadence:

• Regular meetings: [Frequency, e.g., monthly]
• Special meetings: As required for urgent matters

Decision Authority:

• Approve AI deployments within defined risk thresholds
• Approve policy exceptions
• Escalate matters requiring [Board/Executive] approval

4.3 AI System Owners

Each AI system has a designated owner responsible for:

• Day-to-day operation and compliance
• Risk identification and mitigation
• Incident reporting and response
• Performance monitoring
• Ensuring adherence to Charter and policies

4.4 Supporting Functions

Section 5: Decision Rights

5.1 AI Initiative Approval Thresholds

5.2 Risk Classification Criteria

Risk levels are determined based on:

• Impact on individuals (scale, severity, reversibility)
• Data sensitivity
• Regulatory implications
• Reputational exposure
• Operational criticality

[Reference: AI Risk Classification Policy for detailed criteria]

5.3 Policy Exception Authority

Exceptions to AI policies require:

• Documented justification
• Compensating controls
• Time-limited approval
• [AI Governance Committee / appropriate authority] approval
• Regular review of continued exception

Section 6: Operational Requirements

6.1 AI Lifecycle Requirements

All AI systems must comply with requirements at each lifecycle stage:

6.2 Documentation Requirements

All AI systems must maintain:

• System purpose and scope documentation
• Risk assessment and mitigation records
• Approval documentation
• Performance monitoring records
• Incident records
• Change history

6.3 Monitoring Requirements

AI systems require ongoing monitoring proportionate to risk level:

• Performance metrics
• Compliance status
• Security events
• Bias/fairness indicators
• User feedback

6.4 Incident Response

AI incidents must be:

• Reported promptly per [Incident Response Policy]
• Classified by severity
• Investigated with root cause analysis
• Resolved with documented corrective actions
• Reviewed for lessons learned

Section 7: Training and Awareness

7.1 Training Requirements

7.2 Awareness Program

Ongoing awareness activities include:

• Charter and policy communication
• Updates on AI developments
• Incident learnings (anonymized)
• Best practice sharing

Section 8: Amendment and Review

8.1 Review Cycle

This Charter shall be reviewed:

• Annually by the AI Governance Committee
• Following significant regulatory changes
• Following significant AI incidents
• Upon material changes to business strategy

8.2 Amendment Authority

• Minor amendments (clarifications): AI Governance Committee
• Material amendments (scope, structure, principles): [Board/Executive Committee]

8.3 Version Control

All amendments are documented with:

• Amendment date
• Nature of change
• Approval authority
• Effective date

Section 9: Related Documents

This Charter is supported by:

• AI Acceptable Use Policy
• AI Risk Assessment Framework
• AI Data Protection Guidelines
• AI Vendor Management Policy
• AI Incident Response Plan
• [Other relevant policies]

Section 10: Approval

This AI Governance Charter is approved by:

[Signature Block]

Name: _____________________ Title: _____________________ Date: _____________________

Common Failure Modes

Charter without operationalization. A beautifully written charter that doesn't connect to real processes. Every provision should link to operational procedures.

Over-complicated structure. Governance bureaucracy that slows legitimate AI work. Balance oversight with agility.

Vague decision rights. "The committee will review" without specifying what triggers review or what authority it has. Be specific.

Missing enforcement. No consequences for non-compliance renders the charter advisory. Include accountability mechanisms.

Static document. Governance must evolve with AI capabilities and regulatory landscape. Build in review triggers.

Checklist: AI Governance Charter Development

□ Purpose and authority clearly stated
□ Scope defined (what's covered and excluded)
□ Guiding principles articulated
□ Governance structure specified with named roles
□ Decision rights and approval thresholds defined
□ Risk classification criteria referenced
□ Lifecycle requirements outlined
□ Monitoring requirements specified
□ Incident response requirements included
□ Training requirements defined by role
□ Amendment and review process specified
□ Related documents referenced
□ Legal review completed
□ Stakeholder input gathered
□ Board/Executive approval obtained
□ Communication plan developed
□ Operationalization roadmap created

Metrics to Track

Charter compliance:

• AI systems with proper approvals
• Documentation completeness
• Training completion rates

Governance effectiveness:

• Time from request to decision
• Exceptions granted and rationale
• Incident trends

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: How long should a governance charter be? A: Long enough to be complete, short enough to be read. Typically 5-15 pages. Use references to detailed policies rather than embedding everything.

Q: Who should draft the charter? A: Typically risk/compliance with input from IT, legal, and business stakeholders. Final approval from board or executive committee.

Q: How does the charter relate to policies? A: The charter is the authoritative framework; policies provide detailed implementation guidance for specific areas referenced in the charter.

Q: What if we don't have all governance structures in place? A: The charter can establish target state while documenting interim arrangements. Plan to close gaps within defined timeframes.

Q: Should external AI use (vendors) be covered? A: Yes. Vendor AI often poses more risk than internal AI because you have less visibility. Include vendor governance.

Q: How often should the charter be reviewed? A: Annually at minimum, with triggers for significant changes. AI evolves rapidly; governance must keep pace.

Formalize Your AI Governance

A governance charter transforms informal practices into organizational mandate. It provides clarity for decision-makers, assurance for stakeholders, and a foundation for responsible AI at scale.

Book an AI Readiness Audit to assess your current governance practices, develop a tailored charter, and build the operational processes that bring governance to life.

[Book an AI Readiness Audit →]

References

1. IMDA Singapore. (2024). Model AI Governance Framework (2nd Edition).
2. ISO/IEC 42001:2023. Artificial Intelligence Management System.
3. NIST. (2023). AI Risk Management Framework.
4. WEF. (2024). Model AI Governance Framework Companion Document.