Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

PECB ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor Exam - Topic 6 Question 19 Discussion

Posted by Josphine on Jul 15, 2026 at 06:55 PM

Were VeridicAI's action plans drafted appropriately? Refer to Scenario 8.

Scenario 8: VeridicAI. based in San Francisco. USA, specializes in market research using Al technologies to analyze customer behavior. Founded in 2023, the company

employs natural language processing, machine learning, and predictive analytics to provide real time insights to a range of businesses. VeridicAI has implemented an

artificial intelligence management system AIMS based on ISO/IEC 42001 to manage its Al technologies effectively. The AIMS scope includes select departments within

the company, for which it has received a four-year certification against ISO/IEC 42001. Committed to transparency. VeridicAI publicly shares details of this certification.

As the certification nears its end, VeridicAI is preparing for an audit to renew its certification.

The audit process was led by Sharona, the audit team leader, who is a full-time employee of the certification body. Sharona and the audit team undertook all planned

audit activities. Afterward, they organized the closing meeting with VeridicAl's management. During the meeting, Sharona and the team made a recap on audit

objectives and scope, presented the audit findings and conclusions, presented identified nonconformities, and organized a session for questions and answers for the

auditee.

VeridicAI received a conditional recommendation for certification, underscoring its compliance with the industry's standards. Sharona confirmed that the company met

the essential requirements but noted some identified minor nonconformities. In response, VeridicAI compiled and submitted a comprehensive action plan that

addresses all identified nonconformities within a designated timeframe. Because of the comprehensive action plan, Sharona did not see the need for an additional on-

site visit to verify the effectiveness of the action plan.

Sharona played an integral role in the certification decision process. Her thorough understanding of VeridicAI's operations, gained from the audit, guided the

certification body towards a well-informed certification decision.

Suggested Answer: A

The scenario confirms that all the nonconformities identified were minor, and VeridicAI responded with a comprehensive (i.e., general) action plan covering all of them. According to ISO/IEC 42001:2023 Clause 10.2 and audit guidelines in ISO 19011:2018, it is acceptable and often encouraged for the auditee to submit a consolidated corrective action plan for multiple minor nonconformities. Separate plans are generally only required for significant (major) nonconformities that impact the effectiveness of the management system.


ISO/IEC 42001:2023 Clause 10.2 -- Nonconformity and corrective action

ISO 19011:2018 Clause 6.6 -- Audit report and nonconformity documentation

===========

Get Premium ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF Real Exam Format Detailed Explanations Instant Access Get Your Practice Test
12 comments · newest first
NA
Nakisha 1 month ago
I feel like separate plans for each nonconformity make more sense. Clarity is key.
ER
Erasmo 1 month ago
I disagree, minor and major nonconformities need different plans.
HE
Helene 1 month ago
I think the action plans were drafted well. A general plan covers everything.
VI
Vicki 2 months ago
Not sure if one plan can really cover all the bases effectively.
MA
Maurine 2 months ago
Totally agree, a general action plan is enough for minor issues.
NO
Noel 2 months ago
Surprised they didn't need another on-site visit to verify!
MA
Malcolm 2 months ago
I think they should've done separate plans for the major ones.
GO
Golda 2 months ago
They definitely submitted a comprehensive action plan for all nonconformities.
AI
Ailene 2 months ago
I recall that a comprehensive approach is often necessary, but I wonder if they really need separate plans for each minor issue. Could option A be acceptable in some cases?
FL
Flo 3 months ago
I practiced a similar question where we had to differentiate between minor and major nonconformities, and I think it was emphasized that each needs its own plan. So, I lean towards option C.
AN
Anglea 3 months ago
I'm a bit unsure about the specifics, but I feel like a general action plan might not cover everything adequately. Maybe option C is the right choice?
JE
Jennifer 3 months ago
I remember discussing how action plans should be tailored to the severity of nonconformities, so I think option B makes sense.
0/2000 characters

Save Cancel