Terms related to trustworthiness · 3.5.14
transparency
a property of an organisation that communicates the right activities and decisions to relevant stakeholders fully, accessibly and understandably
What this term settles
The definition is deliberately narrow. It tells the reader what counts as transparency and leaves the engineering choices outside the word.
Who it binds
The entry has no shall in it. Its force comes from use: once transparency appears in a procedure or a supplier term, this is the meaning the reader is entitled to rely on.
What to do in your practice
Write the entry into the glossary the firm actually reads, not a shelf document. Check the two artefacts where the word does most work and note any sentence that stretches the meaning.
Evidence an auditor or regulator asks for
- A controlled vocabulary entry for transparency with the citation 3.5.14, an owner and a review date.An auditor can check that the term is controlled rather than assumed.
- An assurance argument that links the property to the test, the review or the incident record behind it.Shows transparency in use in the artefact the firm relies on, not only in a glossary.
- A register row with the owner, the date and the evidence reference for the claim.The assurance case asserts the property without naming the test, review or incident record that supports it.
Common gaps this page catches
- transparency is used in the assurance argument without a written definition, so two teams can mean different things.
- A supplier uses the same word with a different boundary and nobody has recorded the difference.
What to prepare before the amendment lands
Put transparency on the agenda of the next AI governance meeting with two questions: where is it used, and what would show it is used correctly? Record the answers as actions.
How to test it here
Take one live artefact rather than a template, find the sentence or field where transparency is used, and put this page beside it. Record the answer, the artefact and the date, because that record is the evidence and a glossary entry on its own is only an intention.
What this page does not claim
The page does not reproduce the standard, certify the firm or predict the wording the amendment will use; it states transparency at the claim level "definition" and stops where the public record stops.
Common questions
- What does transparency mean in ISO 22989?
- a property of an organisation that communicates the right activities and decisions to relevant stakeholders fully, accessibly and understandably
- What evidence should we keep for 3.5.14?
- A controlled vocabulary entry for transparency with the citation 3.5.14, an owner and a review date. An assurance argument that links the property to the test, the review or the incident record behind it.
- Is transparency a requirement?
- No: transparency is a definition or clause of a terminology standard, and it becomes binding only when a firm writes it into a policy, a contract or a procedure, or when another standard incorporates it.
Related units
Source. ISO/IEC 22989:2022, Clause 3.5.14, Terms and definitions. Open the ISO public entry. Retrieved 21 October 2026.
https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/en/#iso:std:iso-iec:22989:ed-1:v1:en
ISO catalogue record 88145, the amendment status, stage and dates. Catalogue record 74296, the base standard.
Claim level: definition. The definition is in the public preview. This page states it in our own words and does not reproduce the text.
Last updated: 2026-10-21 · Markdown version · Check your vocabulary