Duty of care
The standard of reasonable conduct a certified professional owes to a learner or family within their defined scope. For CSFDP, this includes competence within scope, honest disclosure of the limits of that competence, consistent application of the privacy and consent protocols, and accurate, non speculative documentation. It is real and enforceable but narrower than the fiduciary duty a licensed attorney or financial advisor carries.
Defined in 6 GAGE programs, which carry 6 distinct definitions of it. The wording above is taught in Senior AI Scam Defense.
How each discipline defines it
The same term does different work depending on who is using it. These are the definitions as each program teaches them, unedited.
The standard of reasonable conduct a certified professional owes to a learner or family within their defined scope. For CSFDP, this includes competence within scope, honest disclosure of the limits of that competence, consistent application of the privacy and consent protocols, and accurate, non speculative documentation. It is real and enforceable but narrower than the fiduciary duty a licensed attorney or financial advisor carries.
The fiduciary duty to inform oneself before deciding and to act with the care a reasonably prudent person in a like position would use. Codified in the United Kingdom at section 174 of the Companies Act 2006, with both an objective and a subjective limb.
A legal standard requiring an entity to take reasonable steps to prevent foreseeable harm to those affected by its conduct or product; the core mechanism underlying both KOSA's platform obligations and Colorado's since-repealed SB 24-205.
The threshold legal question in a negligence claim: does the law recognize an obligation running from this defendant to this claimant to take reasonable care? In Singapore, established through the Spandeck test.
The legal obligation of a professional (lawyer, doctor, engineer) to exercise the competence their role requires. Using AI output does not transfer this duty to the tool; the professional remains responsible.
Where it is taught
The exact lessons this term appears in. The first module of every program is free with a free account.
- AI Output Ownership and Accountability Frameworks · Ethical and Responsible AI and Operational Governance, Certified AI Practitioner: Workplace Foundations
- Who Pays When the Agent Errs II · The Law and the Regulators, Certified Agentic AI Governance Professional (CAAGP)
- Who owns the output: IP, training-data provenance, and the liability chain when AI work goes wrong · Evidence Engineering, Certified AI Governance Professional (CAIGP)
- Cross-Partisan Value Framing: Liberty, Equity, Pragmatism, and the Universals · Ethics as Sustainable Strategy, The AI Lobbyist: Certified AI Policy Strategist
- Governance principles and corporate governance foundations · Enterprise Governance, Strategy, and Decision Rights, Certified Enterprise Governance, Risk and Compliance Professional (CEGP)
- Scope of Practice, Liability, and Marketing Ethics · CSFDP: Teaching, Ethics, and the Practicum, Senior AI Scam Defense
Where it shows up at work
A definition is where Duty of care starts. The lessons above teach it inside the competencies below, which are what job descriptions ask for and what the GAGE credential records. Every link here is drawn from the same careers map that builds a role's readiness check.
Turns controls into enforceable obligations: data use, change notice, audit rights, incident duties, subcontractors, IP, exit and deletion.
One lesson on this page teach it as a primary outcome.
Identifies value conflicts in an AI use, asks who benefits and who bears risk, and turns principles into criteria a review can apply.
One lesson on this page teach it as a primary outcome.
Decides what a person affected by an AI decision must be told, how an output can be explained, and how they can challenge it.
One lesson on this page teach it as a primary outcome.
Roles that hire for it
Each role page shows the full competency set, what the seat decides, and a readiness check against your own evidence.
- AI Regulatory Counselneeds it at depth · 14 open postings this week
- Responsible AI Leadneeds it at depth · 7 open postings this week
- AI Vendor Risk Managerneeds it at depth
- Third-Party Cyber Risk Managerneeds it at depth
- Third-Party AI Risk Analystneeds working knowledge
- Ethical AI Specialistneeds it at depth · 5 open postings this week
How job descriptions say it
Postings rarely use the textbook word. These are the phrases the careers map reads as asking for the competencies above.
Where the frameworks place it: GDPR Article 28; EU AI Act value-chain obligations; OECD AI Principles; UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of AI.
One interview question about it
Which contract terms would you insist on before a vendor's model touches customer data, and what happens when the vendor changes the model?
Asked of candidates for contract terms that allocate ai risk. Answering it in your own words is exactly how a GAGE topic is passed, and the credential records the pass where an employer can check it.
If you come from another field
Some backgrounds already carry this competency, and the readiness check gives credit for it.
- Legal and paralegal work carries it as work you can show: Contract terms are your product.
- A law degree (JD, LLB or LLM), no AI work yet carries it as a claim to back up: Contract terms that move risk are a first-year subject.
- Nonprofit program and grants oversight carries it as a claim to back up: Mission accountability and beneficiary protection are ethical reasoning in practice.
Terms it appears with
Not an alphabetical neighbourhood: these are the terms taught in the same lessons, ranked by how often they appear together.