One thing is evident if you've been following the development of Global Capability Centers (GCCs) over the last few years: they are no longer only back offices.

India's GCC ecosystem generated $76 billion in direct economic output in FY2025 a six-fold expansion since 2010, with the industry already employing nearly two million experts and expected to reach $99–105 billion by 2030.

According to EY's GCC Pulse Survey 2025, 58% of GCCs in India are now actively investing in Agentic AI, and 83% are scaling GenAI projects not piloting them, scaling them.

That is a significant change. GCCs are no longer carrying out headquarters-defined tasks. They are developing the systems that will specify how multinational corporations function, make choices, and provide customer service.

This presents an unsettling question: who owns AI developed or run by a GCC when it makes a decision that impacts a consumer, a market, or a regulatory outcome?

The Accountability Gap That No One Talks About Enough

That is a significant change. GCCs are no longer carrying out headquarters-defined tasks. They are developing the systems that will specify how multinational corporations function, make choices, and provide customer service.

This presents an awkward question: who owns AI developed or ru

n by a GCC when it makes a decision that impacts a consumer, a market, or a regulatory outcome?

The EY survey found that only 7% of GCCs have a fully embedded Center of Excellence for cybersecurity governance, a proxy for broader governance maturity. Data privacy concerns have jumped from 32% to 42% year-on-year as a key operational challenge.

The governance infrastructure simply hasn't kept pace with the ambition.

Why ISO 42001 is Particularly Relevant For GCCs

ISO/IEC 42001 - the international AI Management System standard offers an internationally accepted structure for clearly defining AI ownership, accountability, and supervision at an organizational level something that GCCs lack today.

More significantly, it provides solutions to the difficult concerns that are usually skirted in GCC governance discussions: who bears the risk of AI when systems operate across borders? When does the output of a technical model turn into a commercial decision that needs human accountability? How can governance be integrated into delivery without creating a bottleneck?

The Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) technique is the foundation of the standard. Creating a repeatable, auditable mechanism for the future governance of AI judgments is more important than recording what you've already done. That is a significant improvement over the unofficial, dispersed methods that the majority of GCCs now use when running at scale.

What A GCC Service Provider Brings To This

In practical terms, putting ISO 42001 into practice is not a documentation task. It necessitates adjustments to the way organizations are set up, how risk is evaluated, and how responsibility is allocated. Experienced GCC service providers add genuine value in this situation.

The most beneficial couples excel in four areas.

First, for governance to run alongside delivery rather than be added on after, they first translate the standard into practical reality by integrating ISO 42001 standards into current agile workflows, DevOps pipelines, and data governance procedures.

Secondly, they assist in creating models of shared accountability between global headquarters and GCCs. Questions like who owns what, when decisions become more important, and how technical and business leadership work together on AI risk require explicit, agreed-upon responses rather than presumptions.

Third, they incorporate risk and effect analyses early on, during the design phase, rather than after a system is operational and an issue has been identified. This distinguishes reactive damage control from proactive governance.

Fourth, they contribute to the development of scalable governance. Standardized, repeatable governance procedures are necessary for a GCC that operates across numerous teams, geographical areas, and AI use cases; a one-time evaluation that disappears after a quarter or two is not enough. The GCCs' strategic advantage

The claim that ISO 42001-aligned governance is more than merely risk mitigation for GCCs is one that isn't made frequently enough. It accelerates one's career.

GCCs gain a different sort of trust if they can exhibit AI governance maturity and worldwide leadership in structured, accountable, and monitored AI activities. They are given consideration for mandates with more significance. Instead of continuing to be delivery partners, they get closer to making strategic decisions.

Over half of India's GCCs (52%) already hold shared accountability for global decisions, with another 26% formally consulted.

Moving toward true ownership of AI results is the next step, which necessitates proving that governance frameworks are in place to support that degree of accountability.

One of the best ways to prove that is using ISO 42001.

How Enablr Can Help GCCs

ISO 42001 is more than just a compliance obligation for GCCs; it's a strategic opportunity. At Enablr, we collaborate closely with global businesses and GCCs to integrate AI governance into practical operating models. For businesses seeking to create, manage, and optimize a GCC with speed, intelligence, and rapid business effect, Enablr provides AI-led solutions.

• We provide gap evaluations and ISO 42001 readiness for GCC settings.

• Assist in creating shared accountability and governance frameworks between headquarters and GCCs,

• Incorporating risk assessments for AI into current delivery processes

• Assistance in uniformly scaling governance across teams, geographical areas, and use cases.
  
  

Our practical goal is to assist GCCs in managing AI without impeding progress while fostering the kind of confidence with international stakeholders that allows for increased accountability. We can assist you in using ISO 42001 to improve your governance maturity and strategic relevance if your GCC is developing or running AI systems that have an impact on actual business decisions.

[CTA BUTTON] → Talk to Our GCC Governance Team

FAQs

What is ISO 42001 and why does it matter for GCCs?

The first global standard for AI Management Systems (AIMS) is ISO/IEC 42001. As GCCs go from delivery execution to developing AI systems that impact actual business choices, it offers a globally recognized framework for establishing unambiguous AI ownership, accountability frameworks, and continuous oversight.

Who owns AI accountability in a GCC model the center or headquarters?

ISO 42001 specifically aids in closing this gap. Today, engineering teams, compliance departments, and regional and international leadership share unclear accountability for AI in the majority of GCC setups. A structured method for designing shared ownership models, escalation procedures, and decision rights across geographical boundaries is offered by ISO 42001.

How does ISO 42001 align with the way GCCs operate?

The Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) approach that underpins ISO 42001 fits in well with the DevOps and agile delivery processes that are typical in GCCs. When governance is properly deployed, it operates in tandem with delivery rather than as a stand-alone burden, allowing GCCs to maintain delivery velocity while establishing auditable AI control.

Is ISO 42001 relevant to GCCs operating across multiple geographies?

Indeed, this is one of the standard's main advantages in the context of the GCC. It offers a uniform governance structure that can be used across teams, regions, and AI use cases, substituting standardized, repeatable procedures for unofficial, dispersed methods.

How does AI governance maturity affect a GCC's strategic standing with headquarters?

Considerably. Global leadership is more trusting of GCCs that can exhibit organized, responsible, and closely watched AI operations. Given that 52% of India's GCCs already share responsibilities for international decisions, this translates into consideration for higher-impact mandates and a change from delivery partner to strategic contributor.

What does Enablr's ISO 42001 support for GCCs include?

Enablr offers shared governance design bet and ISO 42001 readiness and gap assessments customized for GCC contexts.