Consequently, the document translates broad principles into step-by-step action. The Due Diligence Governance Standards sit at the centre of the new publication. Moreover, the framework promises interoperability with emerging regional laws, including the EU AI Act. Thirty-eight member states and seventeen partners endorse the release, elevating its weight. Nevertheless, trade unions already voice reservations about worker protections.

Global Framework Officially Released

Publication timing signals intent. Consequently, the OECD chose the Summit backdrop to maximise diplomatic visibility. The guidance spans 61 pages and carries DOI 10.1787/41671712-en. It builds on the 2024 revision of the OECD AI Principles and the 2023 update of the Multinational Enterprises Guidelines. Moreover, over 100 representatives shaped the text, including labour and civil society.

This broad drafting process strengthens legitimacy while keeping the language voluntary. Nevertheless, the organisation stresses that governments may integrate expectations into procurement rules. The Due Diligence Governance Standards therefore act as a soft-law bridge. Two lines summarise this section: The guidance fills a gap between principles and practice. However, future binding measures remain possible.

Transitioning from release details, the next focus is the risk methodology.

Six Step Risk Process

The heart of the document is a six-step routine. Each step mirrors established responsible business conduct due-diligence logic.

• Embed policy and management systems.
• Identify and prioritise impacts.
• Cease, prevent, or mitigate risks.
• Track implementation and metrics.
• Communicate actions transparently.
• Provide or co-operate in remediation.

Furthermore, the OECD supplies practical annexes for each actor group. Templates include AI system inventories, supplier clauses, and escalation workflows. Consequently, enterprises can adopt components without reinventing controls. The Due Diligence Governance Standards appear ten times inside this guide, reinforcing branding. Two-line summary: The six steps translate abstract ethics into granular tasks. Next, we examine who must apply them.

Value Chain Coverage Explained

Unlike earlier frameworks, this text maps duties across the entire AI value chain. Suppliers of data, compute, or finance hold tailored responsibilities. Meanwhile, model developers must document design choices, testing results, and deployment constraints. Users, such as retailers embedding chatbots, must monitor performance and share incident data.

Additionally, roles can overlap because enterprises often supply and deploy simultaneously. Proportionality remains a core principle; smaller firms receive scaled expectations. Consequently, implementation burden balances risk severity with organisational capacity. The Due Diligence Governance Standards guide each actor through role-specific examples. Section takeaway: Responsibilities span suppliers, developers, and users. Nevertheless, the next debate concerns stakeholder sentiment.

The article now turns to reactions.

Stakeholder Reactions Remain Mixed

Official messaging highlights broad endorsement, yet criticism surfaced within hours. TUAC’s Veronica Nilsson argued the text is “risk-agnostic” toward workers. In contrast, Business at OECD praised its flexibility, citing reduced red tape. Civil society network OECD Watch asked for stronger benchmarks and enforcement paths. Moreover, SMEs fear resource constraints despite proportionality language. Consequently, the guidance must prove workable during pilot adoption. Two-line recap: Support exists, but labour and civil voices call for tougher rules. However, operational challenges will test consensus.

Next, we explore those very challenges.

Implementation Challenges For Enterprises

Operationalising the framework demands governance updates, tooling, and cultural change. First, firms must establish an AI registry to track models across lifecycles. Furthermore, cross-functional committees need authority over escalation and risk scoring. Data gathering remains complex because incident indicators vary by sector.

Additionally, supply-chain transparency requires new clauses with upstream providers. SMEs may struggle with audit costs and scarce expertise. Consequently, capacity building services could emerge as a niche market. The Due Diligence Governance Standards expect proportionate measures yet leave cost details open. Section summary: Governance rewiring is unavoidable and resource-intensive. Nevertheless, strategic rewards can offset expenses.

The narrative now shifts to those rewards.

Strategic Benefits For Business

Early adopters anticipate reputational and commercial gains. Investors increasingly prioritise responsible business conduct signals. Moreover, customers value demonstrable trust markers, especially in high-risk sectors like finance and health. Regulators may grant procurement preference to firms aligning with recognised frameworks. Consequently, aligning with the Due Diligence Governance Standards can deliver competitive advantage.

Professionals can deepen their expertise through the AI Researcher™ certification. Additionally, standardised processes streamline cross-border compliance, reducing duplicated audits. Two-line takeaway: Risk discipline can unlock market and funding benefits. However, alignment with other rules remains essential.

We therefore proceed to interoperability.

Alignment With Other Frameworks

The guidance cross-references the EU AI Act, NIST RMF, and ISO technical standards. Consequently, companies can map internal controls once, then reuse evidence across jurisdictions. Moreover, the OECD plans an online navigation tool later this year. This platform will link the Due Diligence Governance Standards with national regulations and industry metrics. Nevertheless, the document remains voluntary; legal standing comes from domestic transposition. Interoperability therefore depends on regulatory uptake and industry adoption. Section summary: Cross-framework mapping simplifies global compliance journeys. Yet, voluntary status places responsibility on corporate leadership.

The article now concludes with key reflections.

Conclusion

The OECD’s release elevates responsible AI from slogan to structured program. Moreover, the Due Diligence Governance Standards provide a repeatable six-step model across the value chain. Stakeholder reactions highlight both legitimacy and lingering gaps, especially around worker rights. Consequently, enterprises must invest in governance, tooling, and skills. Alignment promises reputational dividends and easier regulatory engagement.

Nevertheless, real-world testing will determine long-term value. Forward-looking leaders should study the full guidance, update policies, and pursue recognised credentials. Therefore, explore the linked certification and future OECD tools to stay ahead of evolving AI risk expectations.