
The Artificial Intelligence (AI) Risk Management Framework by NIST enables organizations designing, developing, deploying, or using AI systems to incorporate comprehensive AI Testing, Evaluation, Validation, and Verification (TEVV) practices, thereby managing the many risks of AI and promoting trustworthy and responsible development and use of AI systems.
The AI Risk Management Framework functions (GOVERN, MAP, MEASURE, MANAGE) can be applied to fit the interests and needs for organizations of all sizes and in all sectors.
GOVERN
The GOVERN function ensures policies, processes, procedures and practices across the organization related to the mapping, measuring and managing of AI risks are in place, transparent, and implemented effectively.
MAP
The MAP function establishes the context to frame risks related to an AI system. The AI lifecycle consists of many interdependent activities involving a diverse set of actors. The information gathered while carrying out the MAP function enables negative risk prevention and informs decisions for processes such as model management, as well as an initial decision about appropriateness or the need for an AI solution.
MEASURE
The MEASURE function employs quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method tools, techniques, and methodologies to analyze, assess, benchmark, and monitor AI risk and related impacts.
MANAGE
The MANAGE function entails allocating risk resources to mapped and measured risks on a regular basis and as defined by the GOVERN function. Risk treatment comprises plans to respond to, recover from, and communicate about incidents or events.
| AID | 11 |
|---|---|
| Function | GOVERN |
| FID | GOV-3 |
| Description | Workforce diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility processes are prioritized in the mapping, measuring, and managing of AI risks throughout the lifecycle. |
| Category | Governance and Oversight, AI Design |
| GID | Govern 3.1 |
| Guidance | A diverse team that includes AI actors with diversity of experience, disciplines, and backgrounds to enhance organizational capacity and capability for anticipating risks is better equipped to carry out risk management. Consultation with external personnel may be necessary when internal teams lack a diverse range of lived experiences or disciplinary expertise. To extend the benefits of diversity, equity, and inclusion to both the users and AI actors, it is recommended that teams are composed of a diverse group of individuals who reflect a range of backgrounds, perspectives and expertise. Without commitment from senior leadership, beneficial aspects of team diversity and inclusion can be overridden by unstated organizational incentives that inadvertently conflict with the broader values of a diverse workforce. |
| Recommendations | Organizational management can: - Define policies and hiring practices at the outset that promote interdisciplinary roles, competencies, skills, and capacity for AI efforts. |
| Documentation | Organizations can document the following AI Transparency Resources |
| Tasks | Diversity, Interdisciplinarity, Governance |
| Reference(s) | Dylan Walsh, “How can human-centered AI fight bias in machines and people?” MIT Sloan Mgmt. Rev., 2021. [URL](https://mitsloan.mit.edu/ideas-made-to-matter/how-can-human-centered-ai-fight-bias-machines-and-people) Michael Li, “To Build Less-Biased AI, Hire a More Diverse Team,” Harvard Bus. Rev., 2020. [URL](https://hbr.org/2020/10/to-build-less-biased-ai-hire-a-more-diverse-team) Bo Cowgill et al., “Biased Programmers? Or Biased Data? A Field Experiment in Operationalizing AI Ethics,” 2020. [URL](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2012.02394.pdf) Naomi Ellemers, Floortje Rink, “Diversity in work groups,” Current opinion in psychology, vol. 11, pp. 49–53, 2016. Katrin Talke, Søren Salomo, Alexander Kock, “Top management team diversity and strategic innovation orientation: The relationship and consequences for innovativeness and performance,” Journal of Product Innovation Management, vol. 28, pp. 819–832, 2011. Sarah Myers West, Meredith Whittaker, and Kate Crawford,, “Discriminating Systems: Gender, Race, and Power in AI,” AI Now Institute, Tech. Rep., 2019. [URL](https://ainowinstitute.org/discriminatingsystems.pdf) Sina Fazelpour, Maria De-Arteaga, Diversity in sociotechnical machine learning systems. Big Data & Society. January 2022. doi:10.1177/20539517221082027 Mary L. Cummings and Songpo Li, 2021a. Sources of subjectivity in machine learning models. ACM Journal of Data and Information Quality, 13(2), 1–9 “Staffing for Equitable AI: Roles & Responsibilities,” Partnership on Employment & Accessible Technology (PEAT, peatworks.org). Accessed Jan. 6, 2023. [URL](https://www.peatworks.org/ai-disability-inclusion-toolkit/ai-disability-inclusion-resources/staffing-for-equitable-ai-roles-responsibilities/) |
