Provider (Article 3(3))
Any natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body that develops an AI system or a general-purpose AI model or that has an AI system or a general-purpose AI model developed and places it on the market or puts the AI system into service under its own name or trademark, whether for payment or free of charge.
Defined in 2 GAGE programs, which carry 4 distinct definitions of it. The wording above is taught in EU AI Act Implementation Expert.
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.
Any natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body that develops an AI system or a general-purpose AI model or that has an AI system or a general-purpose AI model developed and places it on the market or puts the AI system into service under its own name or trademark, whether for payment or free of charge.
The organization that develops an AI system, or has it developed, and places it on the market or puts it into service under its own name or trademark. Providers carry the heaviest obligations under the Act, including the build-side documentation and conformity work.
An entity that develops an AI system, or has it developed, and places it on the market or puts it into service under its own name or trademark; providers carry obligations under Article 16 including the quality management system (Article 17), technical documentation (Article 11), and conformity assessment (Article 43).
The natural or legal person who develops an AI system or has it developed and places it on the market or puts it into service under their own name or trademark. For Article 95 code purposes, a provider typically owns or can access technical documentation and can commit to technical governance practices.
Where it is taught
The exact lessons this term appears in. The first module of every program is free with a free account.
- The two gates: is it an AI system, and does the Act apply to your organization at all · The EU AI Act: The Executive Map, Certified AI Governance Professional (CAIGP)
- Organizational Positioning: Legal, Compliance, IT, or Operations? · The EU AI Act Expert Role, EU AI Act Implementation Expert
- Transparency and Information to Deployers (Article 13) · High-Risk AI Requirements: The Technical File, EU AI Act Implementation Expert
- Codes of Conduct for Non-High-Risk AI (Article 95) · Governance, Sandboxes, and SME Support, EU AI Act Implementation Expert
Where it shows up at work
A definition is where Provider (Article 3(3)) 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.
Decides what a person affected by an AI decision must be told, how an output can be explained, and how they can challenge it.
2 lessons on this page teach it as a primary outcome.
Designs decision rights, committees, intake, approval tiers and escalation so routine uses move and consequential uses get reviewed.
One lesson on this page teach it as a primary outcome.
Decides where AI should be used, where it should not, and which use cases create measurable value, tied to the organization's priorities.
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.
- Responsible AI Leadneeds it at depth · 7 open postings this week
- Chief AI Officerneeds it at depth
- Chief Compliance Officer, AI compliance editionneeds it at depth
- Chief Privacy Officer, AI privacy editionneeds working knowledge
- VP of AI Governance and Ethicsneeds it at depth
- AI Regulatory Counselneeds working knowledge · 14 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: EU AI Act Articles 13 and 50; NIST AI RMF trustworthiness characteristics; NIST AI RMF GOVERN; ISO/IEC 42001 Clause 5.
One interview question about it
A customer asks why the model decided against them. What can you explain, what can you not, and how can they contest it?
Asked of candidates for explainability, transparency and contestability. 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.
- A business, MBA or technology management degree carries it as a claim to back up: Strategy and opportunity triage are the core of the degree.
Terms it appears with
Not an alphabetical neighbourhood: these are the terms taught in the same lessons, ranked by how often they appear together.