Key AIPGF Practitioner terms, acronyms, concepts, and distinctions for final review.
Use this glossary when AIPGF Practitioner terms start to blur under scenario pressure. It is a compact reminder, not a replacement for the main applied lessons.
Using evidence to judge the current state of AI governance capability rather than relying on confidence or aspiration. See benchmarking current maturity.
The AI Project Governance Capability Maturity Model, used by APMG to support maturity benchmarking and structured improvement decisions.
Adapting the framework to the organization’s context and the project’s size, complexity, and AI-related risk without removing essential governance. See tailoring by size, complexity, and risk.
Independent or structured review that checks whether governance expectations are being met credibly rather than assumed. See controls, evidence, and assurance.
Clarity about who may approve, challenge, review, or escalate the use of AI in project work. See assigning roles and responsibilities.
The order in which governance improvement actions should be introduced so that the framework becomes usable instead of merely documented. See implementation sequencing and next steps.
Spend extra time on terms that separate:
If you can see the broad issue but still miss the strongest option, use this glossary for precision first, then return to the matching lesson, Cheat Sheet, or Practice to test whether the exact term changes your scenario judgment.