An Interim AI Use Policy is a temporary set of rules that governs how people and systems may use AI while a fuller policy is being developed. It defines allowed use cases, data handling limits, approval steps, logging, and accountability for risks such as leakage, misuse, and unauthorized access.
What an interim AI use policy covers
An interim ai use policy is not a full AI governance programme, but it still has to set the minimum rules that stop ad hoc AI use from creating immediate exposure. The scope usually includes approved tools, forbidden data types, required human review, and who is accountable when something goes wrong.
Because the policy is temporary, its main value is speed with guardrails. It gives staff a clear decision boundary while the organisation finishes a fuller operating model, instead of leaving teams to improvise with consumer AI tools, unsanctioned prompts, or inconsistent approval habits.
Why interim policies exist
Interim policies are most common when AI adoption has already started but the formal policy, risk review, or governance process is still being built. That gap matters because AI use can begin in everyday work long before legal, security, privacy, and operations teams agree on a mature standard.
A well-written interim policy narrows the gap between experimentation and control. It tells people what they may do now, what must wait, and what needs review before sensitive material, customer data, or regulated workflows are exposed to an AI system.
For many organisations, the interim document becomes the first enforceable expression of AI governance. NHIMG’s AI Governance Guide provides the broader context for how temporary rules eventually fit into a fuller programme.
Core controls inside the policy
The most useful interim policies are specific enough to be operational, but not so elaborate that nobody can follow them. They usually define permitted use cases, data handling limits, escalation paths for approvals, and logging or review expectations for higher-risk use.
Data handling is usually the most important boundary. If employees can paste confidential content, personal data, source code, or credentials into an external model without restriction, the policy has failed at its primary job even if it looks complete on paper.
Good interim policies also distinguish between low-risk drafting and higher-risk decision support. Simple content generation may be acceptable, while AI use that influences customer decisions, internal approvals, or regulated outputs often needs extra review, traceability, or human sign-off.
When teams are still deciding how to structure the policy stack, NHIMG’s Security Policy Framework Guide is useful for understanding how a temporary policy should sit alongside standards, procedures, exceptions, and review cycles.
How to move from interim to durable governance
An interim policy should not become a permanent substitute for governance. It is a bridge document, so it needs an owner, a review date, and a path into the larger policy set rather than open-ended survival by inertia.
The most effective transition is to convert the temporary rules into a lasting control structure: inventory the approved tools, clarify responsibility for approvals, define escalation for sensitive use cases, and fold the interim language into the broader AI governance model.
That transition also depends on evidence from actual use. A policy that is never reviewed against real usage patterns, exception requests, or logged incidents tends to drift away from practice, which makes it harder to enforce and easier to bypass.
NHIMG’s AI Acceptable Use Policy Template is a practical starting point for organisations that need an enforceable interim document before they build a more complete AI policy library.
What good enforcement looks like
Enforcement does not have to be heavy-handed, but it does need to be visible. If the policy says certain tools are approved and certain data types are prohibited, the organisation should be able to show how people learn those rules and how exceptions are handled.
The clearest interim policies make accountability explicit. They identify the business owner, the approver, and the user’s responsibility for checking whether a task is allowed before AI is introduced into the workflow.
Temporary rules are also easier to enforce when the organisation treats AI use as a policy-managed behaviour, not a personal preference. That framing reduces shadow AI, improves consistency, and makes later governance decisions easier because the organisation already knows what people are actually doing.
If the policy needs a cautionary example of what can happen when AI use outpaces governance, NHIMG’s Samsung ChatGPT leak 2023 shows why temporary guardrails around sensitive data are not optional.
Standards & Framework Alignment
This section maps relevant standards and security frameworks to the operational risks and controls described in this guidance.
NIST CSF 2.0, NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 and OWASP ASVS set the technical controls, while ISO/IEC 27001:2022 defines the regulatory obligations.
| Framework | Control / Reference | Relevance |
|---|---|---|
| NIST CSF 2.0 | GV.PO-01 — Policy | Interim AI use policies are a governance policy mechanism for setting and maintaining organisational rules. |
| GV.RR-01 — Roles, Responsibilities, and Authorities | The policy depends on clear ownership, approval, and accountability for permitted AI use. | |
| ID.RM-01 — Risk Management Strategy | Temporary AI rules are a risk-managed bridge while fuller controls are being developed. | |
| Recommendation — Define, approve, and maintain the interim AI use policy as part of governance policy management. Assign clear owners, approvers, and accountable roles for interim AI use decisions. Treat interim AI use rules as a time-bound risk treatment step and review them against the AI risk strategy. | ||
| NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 | PL-2 — System and Communications Protection Policy and Procedures | The term is a policy artifact defining approved use, handling limits, and accountability. |
| AU-2 — Audit Events | Interim AI policies often require logging and traceability for higher-risk use cases. | |
| Recommendation — Document AI use boundaries, handling requirements, and enforcement procedures in a governed policy set. Define which AI actions and approvals must be logged for review and accountability. | ||
| ISO/IEC 27001:2022 | A.5.1 — Policies for information security | An interim AI use policy is an information-security policy that defines organisational rules for AI use. |
| A.5.15 — Access control | Approved-use boundaries and approval steps often control who may use AI for sensitive work. | |
| Recommendation — Publish and maintain the interim AI policy as part of the organisation’s information security policy set. Restrict AI usage and approvals according to defined access-control rules for sensitive workflows. | ||
| OWASP ASVS | V13 — Configuration | Approved tools, logging, and allowed-use settings align with configuration control for AI-enabled applications. |
| Recommendation — Configure approved AI tools and logging settings to match the interim policy boundaries. | ||
Related resources from NHI Mgmt Group
- How should organisations enforce AI policy compliance across employee and agent use?
- What should teams do when AI use is already happening before policy is ready?
- How should organisations govern AI use without writing a huge new policy first?
- When should organisations move from an interim AI policy to a formal framework?