Should organizations create an “AI charter” defining acceptable project uses and boundaries?

I think a charter can be helpful — but only to a point.

The real issue isn’t the absence of guidelines. It’s how decisions get made when those guidelines meet real-world ambiguity.

Most AI use cases won’t sit cleanly inside predefined boundaries. They’ll involve trade-offs:

• speed vs. risk
• innovation vs. compliance
• local efficiency vs. enterprise impact

A charter can define principles, but it can’t resolve those trade-offs in practice.

Where I’ve seen organizations struggle is assuming that documenting “acceptable use” will remove the gray areas — when in reality, it often just shifts them into interpretation.

The more important question becomes:

How do we make those trade-offs visible and discussable at the right level of the organization?

Without that, a charter risks becoming:

• a compliance artifact
• something teams reference selectively
• or something that gives a false sense of control

The organizations that seem to be navigating this well aren’t relying on static charters alone — they’re pairing them with clear decision pathways and forums where ambiguity can be surfaced and resolved.

A charter can set direction.
But it’s the decision system around it that determines how AI is actually used.

Absolutely, Lissette! As we explore futuristic tech at Total InfoHub, I believe an AI Charter is no longer optional—it's a necessity. Without clear boundaries, organizations risk ethical lapses and data security issues. A well-defined charter ensures that AI is used as a strategic tool to empower human decision-making, not replace it. It’s about creating a safe environment for innovation.

A charter could be the right approach. It really depends on the context of the organization. The problem you're trying to solve is not, "We need a charter," it's "We need appropriate and clear governance and decision-making." The answer could be a charter, but that may just be the starting point. It could also be adaptive governance, guardrails, embedded controls, or a combination of these approaches.

It is not a matter of governance. It is a matter of Responsible AI just in case you will implement generative AI in your initiative. Take a look to Responsible AI and you will find the answers inside it.

I think it is a great idea to provide project managers and other project team members with guidance regarding implementation of AI within their organizations. I am aware of an organization that has created an Internal Policy Governing Use of Artificial Intelligence.