After fourteen years, the 2012 edition of ISO/IEC 17024 is superseded: the new edition, published in 2026 and transposed as UNI CEI EN ISO/IEC 17024 in April 2026, updates structure and terminology and, for the first time, addresses the use of Artificial Intelligence in certification processes. It is a decisive turn, coming just as the schemes for the AI professional profiles are emerging.
Whoever obtains an accredited professional certification — from the DPO to the auditor, to the new AI profiles — encounters ISO/IEC 17024: the standard which “specifies the principles and requirements for a body certifying persons and includes the development and maintenance of a certification scheme for persons”. The traditional wording “certification of persons” must not mislead: the object of certification is not the person as such, but the possession — verified through assessment — of the professional competences defined by the scheme. This seems the right place to explain, in practical terms, how this framework works and what changes with the new edition.
The architecture: scheme, examination, impartiality
The standard’s logic is linear. At the centre stands the certification scheme: the set of competence requirements referring to a given profile — drawn from a technical standard, think in Italy of the ICT and AI profiles of the UNI 11621 series in conjunction with UNI 11506 — and the rules for assessing them: entry prerequisites, examination modes, passing criteria, maintenance and renewal. Around the scheme, the standard oversees three guarantees. The competence of the body and its examiners, who must master the subject matter. Impartiality: the body cannot, among other things, certify the competences of candidates it has itself trained without overseeing the resulting conflicts of interest, and certification decisions rest with those who did not conduct the examination. The validity and reliability of examinations: tests designed to actually measure the declared competences, fairly and reproducibly. Above all, accreditation: the national body — in Italy, Accredia — verifies that the body operates in conformity with the standard. This is what distinguishes an accredited certificate from an attendance certificate: in the former, competence is verified by an independent third party, itself verified.
The new edition: what changes
The 2012 edition has been replaced by ISO/IEC 17024:2026, whose Italian transposition, UNI CEI EN ISO/IEC 17024 (April 2026), entered the national body of standards on 27 April 2026. The publication of the new international standards on the requirements for inspection bodies and for bodies certifying persons was also announced by European co-operation for Accreditation, the network of European accreditation bodies. On the basis of public information, the revision has three directions. The first is structural and terminological modernisation, aligned with the common vocabulary of the ISO/IEC 17000 series on conformity assessment. The second is the reception of technology-mediated examination modes, from supervised remote examination to digital testing environments, which in 2012 simply did not exist in today’s forms. The third, and most significant, is the entry of Artificial Intelligence: the new edition introduces express definitions and requirements for bodies employing AI systems in phases of the certification process. Here is a step of notable systemic value: the standard overseeing the certification of professional competences — including those of AI professionals — itself regulates the use of AI by those who assess and certify.
Why it arrives at the right time
The timing could not be more significant. Precisely in 2026 the certification schemes for the new AI professions matured, in Italy and Europe: UNI 11621-8:2026 on the twelve AI professional profiles, with accreditation rules set by Accredia Circular DC No. 21/2026, and, on the European side, the standard on AI ethicists’ competences on the way to publication. All these schemes live within the frame of ISO/IEC 17024: the quality of examinations, the independence of examiners and the seriousness of certification maintenance are played out on its requirements. A physiological transitional aspect should be noted: the implementing acts issued in the first part of 2026, including the cited circular, still recall the 2012 edition, against which the bodies are accredited; the migration of accreditations to the new edition will follow the transition provisions the accreditation bodies will define. For already-certified professionals there is, at present, no immediate effect on valid certificates.
Practical indications
For the professional assessing a certification: always check that the scheme is accredited, that the body declares the profile’s reference standard, and that maintenance provides effective updating; be wary of certificates without examination or accreditation. For certification bodies: start now the gap analysis between the 2012 edition and the new one, with particular attention to digitised processes and any use of AI tools in examination management, documenting governance and controls. For organisations requiring certified staff: update the references in specifications and qualification requests, specifying the standard’s edition as the accreditation transition proceeds.
Conclusions
The certification of professional competences connects declared knowledge with demonstrated knowledge: the new edition of ISO/IEC 17024 updates this mechanism just as the most recent professions — those of Artificial Intelligence — gain access to it. The seriousness with which bodies and accreditation bodies manage the transition will determine its reliability. In the light of the above, one wonders whether the competence-certification market will grow in quality as well as in volume, with schemes and examinations that are not reduced to the issuing of formal certificates and that keep the promise on which the whole framework rests: that behind an accredited certificate there is always a real competence.
