GCCs Built the AI Muscle for Their Business. Now Who's Responsible for What It Does?
4 min read
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 run 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.
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.
<section class="faq-section"> <div class="faq-inner"> <div class="faq-side fi v"> <div class="eyebrow">FAQs</div> <h2 class="sh2">Related questions</h2> <p class="sp">Straight answers on becoming an AI-first GCC, from strategy to execution.</p> <a href="/contact" class="btn-primary">Talk to Us →</a> </div> <div class="faq-list fi v"> <div class="faq-item"> <div class="faq-q" onclick="toggleFaq(this)" aria-expanded="false"> <span class="faq-q-text">Who is accountable when a GCC's AI system affects a business outcome?</span> <span class="faq-toggle"><svg viewBox="0 0 24 24"><line x1="12" y1="5" x2="12" y2="19"></line><line x1="5" y1="12" x2="19" y2="12"></line></svg></span> </div> <div class="faq-a"> <div class="faq-a-inner"> This is the accountability gap the article centers on. As GCCs move from executing headquarters-defined tasks to building the systems that shape enterprise decisions, ownership of the outcome needs an explicit answer rather than an assumed one. ISO 42001 forces that assignment instead of leaving it implicit. </div> </div> </div> <div class="faq-item"> <div class="faq-q" onclick="toggleFaq(this)" aria-expanded="false"> <span class="faq-q-text">How do we add AI governance into our agile and DevOps workflows without slowing delivery?</span> <span class="faq-toggle"><svg viewBox="0 0 24 24"><line x1="12" y1="5" x2="12" y2="19"></line><line x1="5" y1="12" x2="19" y2="12"></line></svg></span> </div> <div class="faq-a"> <div class="faq-a-inner"> Governance has to run alongside delivery, not get bolted on afterward. GCC service providers do this by folding ISO 42001 requirements directly into existing agile workflows, DevOps pipelines, and data governance procedures, so oversight is part of how the work already happens rather than a separate gate. </div> </div> </div> <div class="faq-item"> <div class="faq-q" onclick="toggleFaq(this)" aria-expanded="false"> <span class="faq-q-text">How should shared accountability between headquarters and a GCC be defined for AI outcomes?</span> <span class="faq-toggle"><svg viewBox="0 0 24 24"><line x1="12" y1="5" x2="12" y2="19"></line><line x1="5" y1="12" x2="19" y2="12"></line></svg></span> </div> <div class="faq-a"> <div class="faq-a-inner"> GCC service providers build explicit, agreed-upon models that spell out what each side owns, when a decision escalates in importance, and how technical and business leadership work together on AI risk. This is already happening at scale: 52% of India's GCCs already hold shared accountability for global decisions, and another 26% are formally consulted. </div> </div> </div> <div class="faq-item"> <div class="faq-q" onclick="toggleFaq(this)" aria-expanded="false"> <span class="faq-q-text">At what point does a technical AI output become a business decision that needs human accountability?</span> <span class="faq-toggle"><svg viewBox="0 0 24 24"><line x1="12" y1="5" x2="12" y2="19"></line><line x1="5" y1="12" x2="19" y2="12"></line></svg></span> </div> <div class="faq-a"> <div class="faq-a-inner"> The article treats this as one of the core questions the standard resolves: defining when a model's output stops being a technical result and becomes a commercial decision someone has to own, rather than letting that line stay undrawn. </div> </div> </div> <div class="faq-item"> <div class="faq-q" onclick="toggleFaq(this)" aria-expanded="false"> <span class="faq-q-text">Can strong AI governance change a GCC's strategic standing inside the enterprise?</span> <span class="faq-toggle"><svg viewBox="0 0 24 24"><line x1="12" y1="5" x2="12" y2="19"></line><line x1="5" y1="12" x2="19" y2="12"></line></svg></span> </div> <div class="faq-a"> <div class="faq-a-inner"> Yes, per the article's framing. It positions ISO 42001-aligned governance as more than risk mitigation—it is a strategic differentiator. GCCs that can show structured, accountable AI governance get considered for more significant mandates and move closer to strategic decision-making instead of staying delivery partners. </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </section> <style> :root{ --faq-ink:#12151c; --faq-body:#5a616f; --faq-line:#e6e8ec; --faq-accent:#4b3df6; --faq-bg:#fbfbfd; } *{box-sizing:border-box;} .faq-section{ background:var(--faq-bg); font-family:'Inter','Helvetica Neue',Arial,sans-serif; padding:80px 24px; } .faq-inner{ max-width:1120px; margin:0 auto; display:grid; grid-template-columns:340px 1fr; gap:64px; align-items:start; } .faq-side{ position:sticky; top:40px; } .eyebrow{ font-size:12px; font-weight:700; letter-spacing:1.5px; text-transform:uppercase; color:var(--faq-accent); margin-bottom:14px; } .sh2{ margin:0 0 12px; font-size:32px; line-height:1.15; letter-spacing:-1px; font-weight:650; color:var(--faq-ink); } .sp{ margin:0 0 20px; font-size:14px; line-height:1.6; color:var(--faq-body); max-width:38ch; } .btn-primary{ display:inline-flex; align-items:center; gap:6px; background:var(--faq-ink); color:#fff; text-decoration:none; font-size:14px; font-weight:600; padding:12px 22px; border-radius:999px; transition:background .2s ease, transform .2s ease; } .btn-primary:hover{ background:var(--faq-accent); transform:translateY(-1px); } .faq-list{ display:flex; flex-direction:column; } .faq-item{ border-bottom:1px solid var(--faq-line); } .faq-item:first-child{ border-top:1px solid var(--faq-line); } .faq-q{ display:flex; align-items:center; justify-content:space-between; gap:24px; padding:22px 4px; cursor:pointer; user-select:none; } .faq-q-text{ font-size:16px; font-weight:560; color:var(--faq-ink); line-height:1.4; transition:color .2s ease; } .faq-q:hover .faq-q-text{ color:var(--faq-accent); } .faq-toggle{ flex:0 0 auto; width:28px; height:28px; border-radius:50%; border:1px solid var(--faq-line); display:flex; align-items:center; justify-content:center; transition:background .25s ease, border-color .25s ease, transform .3s ease; } .faq-toggle svg{ width:14px; height:14px; stroke:var(--faq-ink); stroke-width:2; fill:none; transition:stroke .25s ease; } .faq-q[aria-expanded="true"] .faq-toggle{ background:var(--faq-ink); border-color:var(--faq-ink); transform:rotate(135deg); } .faq-q[aria-expanded="true"] .faq-toggle svg{ stroke:#fff; } .faq-q[aria-expanded="true"] .faq-q-text{ color:var(--faq-ink); font-weight:650; } .faq-a{ display:grid; grid-template-rows:0fr; transition:grid-template-rows .35s ease; } .faq-a-inner{ overflow:hidden; font-size:14.5px; line-height:1.7; color:var(--faq-body); padding-right:52px; } .faq-item.open .faq-a{ grid-template-rows:1fr; } .faq-item.open .faq-a-inner{ padding-bottom:22px; } .fi.v{ animation:faqFadeIn .5s ease both; } @keyframes faqFadeIn{ from{opacity:0; transform:translateY(10px);} to{opacity:1; transform:translateY(0);} } @media (prefers-reduced-motion: reduce){ .faq-a, .faq-toggle, .fi.v{ transition:none; animation:none; } } @media (max-width: 900px){ .faq-inner{ grid-template-columns:1fr; gap:32px; } .faq-side{ position:static; } } @media (max-width: 520px){ .faq-section{ padding:56px 18px; } .sh2{ font-size:26px; } .faq-q-text{ font-size:15px; } .faq-a-inner{ padding-right:0; } }</style><script> function toggleFaq(qEl){ var item = qEl.closest('.faq-item'); var isOpen = item.classList.contains('open'); document.querySelectorAll('.faq-item.open').forEach(function(openItem){ if(openItem !== item){ openItem.classList.remove('open'); openItem.querySelector('.faq-q').setAttribute('aria-expanded','false'); } }); if(isOpen){ item.classList.remove('open'); qEl.setAttribute('aria-expanded','false'); } else { item.classList.add('open'); qEl.setAttribute('aria-expanded','true'); } }</script>
Ready to build your scalable GCC?
Connect with our experts to discuss how we can help you establish and scale a high-performing Global Capability Center tailored to your business needs.
Recent Insights
What Is a GCC in 2026? The New Global Value Model
GCCs in 2026 run lean, own IP, and shape strategy. See the five shifts from cost centre to global value organization and how to build one that fits.
Jul 22, 2026
4 min read
AI-First GCCs: How to Redesign Your Operating Model Before the Market Forces You To
AI agents can rebuild multi-year GCC workflows in weeks. See the four pillars of an AI-first operating model and why GCC leaders need to move now.
Jul 15, 2026
4 min read
How GCCs Are Redefining Enterprise Solutions
From support hubs to strategic drivers. Explore how GCCs are reshaping enterprise solutions through Agentic AI, deep talent pools, and global ownership
Jul 6, 2026
4 min read