The company assumes greater direct accountability: Which risk best answers this?

Owning the whole model concentrates accountability and liability on the company, with no provider to share it.

The question

Preparing for AIGP? Take the free 5-min readiness quiz →

1. The company faces vendor lock-in, becoming dependent on a single external supplier whose pricing, roadmap and support terms it cannot control.

   Almost right but inverted: vendor lock-in is a risk of relying on a third party, which is precisely what building in-house avoids.
2. The company loses control over update timing, since an external provider may change or deprecate the model without its consent.

   Almost right but inverted: uncontrolled updates are a third-party risk, whereas owning the model gives the company control over its lifecycle.
3. The company cannot fine-tune or customize behavior, because the underlying model weights remain closed and inaccessible to it.

   Plausible but wrong: inability to customize characterizes a closed third-party model, not a proprietary model the company itself owns.
4. The company assumes greater direct accountability and liability, owning full responsibility for the model's outputs, safety and compliance. ✓

   Correct: building its own model means no provider shares the burden, so the company bears heightened accountability and liability for outcomes.

How to remember it

Owning the whole model concentrates accountability and liability on the company, with no provider to share it.

More Understanding How to Govern AI Deployment and Use questions

• A data-use clause restricting the vendor from using: Which contract term most directly addresses this concern? →
• Deliver mandatory user training on the tool's approved: Which best applies the organization's deployment →
• Data or concept drift: Which continuous-monitoring finding best explains the decline and should trigger →
• All 424 Understanding How to Govern AI Deployment and Use questions →