⚡ Quick Summary
This crosswalk maps the subcategories of the NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF) to the clauses and Annex B controls of ISO/IEC FDIS 42001, the AI management system standard. No publisher, author, date or version is printed in the extracted text; the document consists of the mapping table itself, laid out under two column labels, "AI RMF" and "ISO/IEC FDIS 42001".
The mapping follows the AI RMF's four functions in order. GOVERN subcategories (Govern 1.1 to Govern 6.2) are linked to ISO clauses 4.1, 5.1–5.3, 6.1–6.2, 7.1–7.4, 8.2–8.4 and 9.1–9.3, and to controls such as B.2.2 AI policy, B.4.6 Human resources and B.10.3 Suppliers. MAP (Map 1.1 to Map 5.2) is tied to impact assessment, data and documentation controls; MEASURE (Measure 1.1 to Measure 4.3) to verification and validation, operation and monitoring, data quality and event logging; and MANAGE (Manage 1.1 to Manage 4.3) to risk treatment, corrective action and operational controls.
The deliverable is a one-directional correspondence table that shows which ISO/IEC FDIS 42001 requirements correspond to each AI RMF subcategory. It carries no commentary, worked example or claim of equivalence.
🧩 What’s Covered
The document is a single mapping table organised by AI RMF function; each row states an AI RMF subcategory in full and lists the ISO/IEC FDIS 42001 clauses and Annex B controls assigned to it.
- GOVERN (pages 1–5): Govern 1.1 to Govern 6.2 — legal and regulatory requirements, integration of trustworthy AI characteristics into policy and practice, risk tolerance, risk treatment, monitoring and review, AI system inventory, safe decommissioning, roles and responsibilities, training, executive accountability, diverse teams, human-AI oversight, safety-first culture, impact documentation, incident information sharing, external feedback, and third-party and intellectual property risk.
- MAP (pages 5–9): Map 1.1 to Map 5.2 — intended purpose and deployment context, interdisciplinary competencies, mission and business value, risk tolerances, system requirements, tasks and methods such as classifiers and generative models, knowledge limits and human oversight documentation, TEVV considerations, benefits and costs, application scope, operator proficiency, legal and third-party component risks, internal controls, and impact likelihood and magnitude.
- MEASURE (pages 9–14): Measure 1.1 to Measure 4.3 — metric selection, assessment by independent or internal experts, TEVV documentation, human-subject requirements, production monitoring, validity and reliability, safety, security and resilience, transparency and accountability, explainability, privacy, fairness and bias, environmental impact, risk tracking, and feedback and appeal processes.
- MANAGE (pages 14–16): Manage 1.1 to Manage 4.3 — decisions on whether development or deployment proceeds, prioritisation and treatment of risks, residual risk, non-AI alternatives, sustainment of deployed systems, response to unknown risks, deactivation, third-party and pre-trained model monitoring, post-deployment monitoring, continual improvement and incident communication.
- ISO/IEC FDIS 42001 references: main-body clauses 4.1, 4.3, 4.4, 5.1–5.3, 6.1.1–6.1.4, 6.2, 7.1–7.5.3, 8.2–8.4, 9.1–9.3.3, 10.1 and 10.2, plus Annex B controls including B.2.2 AI policy, B.4.2–B.4.6 resources, B.5.2–B.5.5 impact assessment, B.6.1.2–B.6.2.8 design, verification and operation, B.7.2–B.7.6 data, B.8.2–B.8.5 documentation, reporting and communication, and B.9.2–B.10.4 responsible use, suppliers and customers.
💡 Why it matters?
For organisations that use the NIST AI RMF and also need a management system, the crosswalk removes part of the manual work of matching AI RMF outcomes to ISO/IEC FDIS 42001 requirements. It lets governance, risk and audit teams see at a glance which clauses and Annex B controls sit behind each GOVERN, MAP, MEASURE and MANAGE subcategory, and where a single ISO control, such as B.5.4 on assessing impact on individuals and groups, serves several AI RMF subcategories.
The table is a navigational aid rather than evidence: it makes no claim that satisfying the listed ISO items demonstrates AI RMF conformance, and it does not mention endorsement by NIST or ISO.
❓ What’s Missing
The document is a mapping table only. It has no cover page, publisher, author, date or version statement in the extracted text, no introduction explaining how the correspondence was derived, and no worked example, evidence guidance or gap-analysis template. The mapping runs in one direction, from AI RMF subcategories to ISO items; no reverse index from ISO clause to AI RMF subcategory is given. The ISO references are to the Final Draft International Standard of 42001 rather than a published edition, so clause and Annex B numbering may differ in the final standard. Some rows repeat entries, for example Govern 5.2 appears twice, and apparent slips occur, such as "7..2 Competence" and "B.2.2 Customers".
👥 Best For
Compliance and risk leads aligning an existing NIST AI RMF programme with ISO/IEC 42001 requirements; implementers drafting AI policy, impact assessment and monitoring controls; internal auditors and assessors planning clause-by-clause evidence collection; and consultants building cross-framework control matrices for clients that must report against both frameworks.
📄 Source Details
NIST AI RMF to ISO/IEC FDIS 42001 AI Management system Crosswalk, 16 pages, English. The document prints no publisher, author, publication date, version, edition or reference number, and no URL. The title appears in a header on page 1 between the column labels "AI RMF" and "ISO/IEC FDIS 42001"; page 1 begins directly with "Govern 1.1", so any cover or front matter may lie outside this extraction. The text covered all 16 pages and consists solely of mapping tables.
