PIMS Scope and Roles Template (ISO/IEC 27701:2025)
PIMS framing for ISO/IEC 27701:2025: privacy context, role per processing activity, scope statement, policy links, ISMS relationship, certification route
Mode d'emploi: Use it when the organization builds a privacy information management system, alone or next to an ISMS, before writing the PIMS SoA. Fill the processing inventory and role determination first. The main pitfall is declaring one role for the whole company and missing controller activities such as HR, contacts and telemetry.
Aperçu
PIMS Scope and Roles: [Organization name]
Defines the context, the PII controller and PII processor roles, the scope and the governance of a privacy information management system (PIMS) under ISO/IEC 27701:2025, the second edition, which is a stand-alone management system standard that can be certified without ISO/IEC 27001. It also records how the PIMS relates to an ISMS under ISO/IEC 27001:2022 + Amd 1:2024 when both are run, and the route to certification by a body that meets ISO/IEC 27706:2025. Replace every
[bracketed]value and every row marked Example. This is a documentation format, not legal advice.
Document control
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Document ID | DOC-ISMS-100 |
| Version | [1.0] |
| Status | [Draft / In review / Approved / Superseded] |
| Owner | [@privacy-lead] |
| Approvers/reviewers | [@dpo], [@isms-manager], [@legal-counsel], [@ceo] |
| Last updated | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Classification | [Internal] |
| Standard and edition | ISO/IEC 27701:2025; ISO/IEC 27706:2025 (certification bodies); ISO/IEC 29100:2024 (privacy framework); ISO/IEC 27001:2022 + Amd 1:2024 where an ISMS is also run |
| Next scheduled review | YYYY-MM-DD (at least every 12 months and after any change of role, service or jurisdiction) |
| PIMS model | [Stand-alone PIMS / PIMS integrated with ISMS / PIMS added to a certified ISMS] |
| Roles in scope | [PII controller / PII processor / both] |
| Related documents | ISMS scope DOC-ISMS-002, context and interested parties DOC-ISMS-003, roles and RACI DOC-ISMS-006, PIMS SoA DOC-ISMS-101 |
Approvals
| Role | Name | Decision | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| PIMS owner | [@privacy-lead] | [Prepared] | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Data protection officer | [@dpo] | [Reviewed] | YYYY-MM-DD |
| ISMS manager (if an ISMS is run) | [@isms-manager] | [Reviewed] | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Top management | [@ceo] | [Approved / Approved with changes] | YYYY-MM-DD |
Revision history
| Version | Date | Author | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.1 (Example) | YYYY-MM-DD | [@privacy-lead] | First draft after the processing inventory workshop |
| 1.0 (Example) | YYYY-MM-DD | [@privacy-lead] | Approved for the certification application |
| [x.y] | YYYY-MM-DD | [@author] | [Change summary] |
Contents
- Purpose and use of this document
- ISO/IEC 27701:2025 at a glance
- Context of the organization for privacy
- Processing inventory and role determination
- PIMS scope statement
- Privacy policy framework
- Relationship with the ISMS
- Leadership, roles and responsibilities
- Certification route
- Size tiers
- Records and evidence
- Review and maintenance
- References
1. Purpose and use of this document
This document records the decisions that frame the PIMS of [Organization name]: the internal and external issues that affect privacy, the interested parties and their privacy requirements, the role the organization plays for each processing activity, the boundaries of the PIMS and the people accountable for it. It is the reference point for the PIMS Statement of Applicability (DOC-ISMS-101), the privacy risk assessment, the record of processing activities and the certification application.
Use it in three situations:
- Design: when the PIMS is first planned, to agree scope and roles before controls are selected.
- Change: when a new service, a new customer type, a new country or an acquisition changes the processing landscape.
- Audit: as the first document shown to internal auditors and to the certification body at Stage 1.
2. ISO/IEC 27701:2025 at a glance
ISO/IEC 27701:2025 is the second edition of the PIMS standard. The first edition (2019) was written as an extension to ISO/IEC 27001 and ISO/IEC 27002, so an organization could only certify its PIMS together with an ISMS. The 2025 edition is a stand-alone management system standard: it contains its own requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining and continually improving a PIMS, and an organization can be certified to it without holding an ISO/IEC 27001 certificate.
What you can rely on when planning, subject to checking your copy:
| Element | What it means for this PIMS |
|---|---|
| Management system requirements | Follow the harmonized structure used by ISO management system standards (context, leadership, planning, support, operation, performance evaluation, improvement), so the PIMS can share processes with an ISMS or another ISO system |
| Control set for PII controllers | Applies to processing where the organization decides purposes and means |
| Control set for PII processors | Applies to processing carried out on behalf of customers or other controllers |
| Information security controls for PII | Security controls that apply to all PII processing, so that a stand-alone PIMS covers the security of PII without depending on ISO/IEC 27001 |
| Implementation guidance | Guidance that supports each control |
| Informative mappings | Correspondence to other frameworks, such as ISO/IEC 29100 principles, the GDPR, ISO/IEC 27018 and ISO/IEC 29151, and to the 2019 edition (as described in published summaries; confirm in your copy) |
Record here the clause and annex references you confirmed in your copy, so later documents cite them consistently:
| Topic | Reference in ISO/IEC 27701:2025 | Confirmed by | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Requirement to determine controller and processor roles | [27701 clause ref] | [@privacy-lead] | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Requirement for a Statement of Applicability | [27701 clause ref] | [@privacy-lead] | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Controller control set | [27701 annex ref] | [@privacy-lead] | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Processor control set | [27701 annex ref] | [@privacy-lead] | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Security controls for PII | [27701 annex ref] | [@privacy-lead] | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Mapping to the 2019 edition | [27701 annex ref] | [@privacy-lead] | YYYY-MM-DD |
Organizations certified to the 2019 edition should agree a transition plan with their certification body. Published summaries report a transition period of about three years, ending in October 2028, but the exact dates come from the accreditation framework and your body: ask it for its transition deadline and audit approach rather than assuming one.
3. Context of the organization for privacy
3.1 Internal and external issues
| ID | Issue | Type | Effect on the PIMS | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CTX-P-001 (Example) | Customers in the EU, UK and US send personal data of their users to the platform | External | Several privacy laws apply; processor terms differ by customer | [@dpo] |
| CTX-P-002 (Example) | Product roadmap adds machine learning features that use customer data | Internal | New purposes must be checked against customer instructions and assessed in a DPIA | [@head-of-product] |
| CTX-P-003 (Example) | Customer security questionnaires increasingly ask for a privacy certificate | External | Certification is a commercial driver; scope must cover the services customers buy | [@ceo] |
| CTX-P-004 (Example) | Marketing team uses several SaaS tools that hold prospect data | Internal | Controller processing in scope; tool inventory needed | [@head-of-marketing] |
3.2 Interested parties and their privacy requirements
| Interested party | Privacy requirements | Source | Addressed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Data subjects (customer end users) | Transparency, rights handling, security of their data | Law, customer privacy notices | Processor assistance procedure, compliance/data-subject-request-procedure |
| Customers acting as controllers | Processing only on instructions, sub-processor control, breach notice, deletion at end of contract | Data processing agreements | legal-lite/dpa, isms/cloud-pii-27018-processor |
| Employees and candidates | Lawful, limited HR processing, notice | Employment law, privacy law | Staff privacy notice, HR retention rules |
| Supervisory authorities | Records of processing and cooperation (controllers and processors), breach notification to the authority where the organization is controller | Privacy law (for example GDPR Articles 30, 31, 33) | compliance/gdpr-ropa, compliance/personal-data-breach-assessment |
| Sub-processors | Clear instructions and security terms | Contracts | Supplier security agreement DOC-ISMS-068 |
Keep the legal and contractual obligations themselves in the legal register (DOC-ISMS-014), with one row per law or contract type, and reference those rows here instead of repeating them.
4. Processing inventory and role determination
The role decides which control set applies. Use the decision flow below
for each processing activity in the record of processing activities
(compliance/gdpr-ropa), then record the result in the table.
| Activity ID | Processing activity | Data subjects | Role | Reasoning | Control sets |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PA-001 (Example) | Hosting and analysing customer event data in the SaaS platform | Customer end users | Processor | Customer decides what data to send and why; the organization follows the service terms | Processor and security |
| PA-002 (Example) | Customer account administration and billing | Customer staff contacts | Controller | The organization decides to collect contact and billing data to run its contracts | Controller and security |
| PA-003 (Example) | Payroll and HR administration | Employees, contractors | Controller | Employer obligations | Controller and security |
| PA-004 (Example) | Product usage telemetry to improve the service | Customer end users (pseudonymous) | Controller | The organization chooses this purpose itself; needs a lawful basis and customer transparency | Controller and security |
| PA-005 (Example) | Co-marketing campaign with a partner | Prospects | Joint controller | Both parties define the audience and purpose | Controller and security |
PA-004 shows the typical trap: analytics on customer data for the provider's own purposes turns a processor into a controller for that activity. Decide it consciously, document the lawful basis and tell customers, or stop the processing.
5. PIMS scope statement
Scope statement (Example): "The privacy information management system of [Organization name] covering the processing of personally identifiable information as PII processor in the provision of the [service name] SaaS platform, and as PII controller for customer account, employee and marketing data, operated from [office location] and remote locations, with production hosted in [cloud regions]."
| Dimension | In scope | Out of scope | Reason for exclusion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Legal entities | [Entity A] | [Entity B, dormant] | [No processing] |
| Services | [SaaS platform, support] | [Legacy on-premises product] | [Retired YYYY-MM-DD, no PII retained] |
| Locations | [Head office, remote staff, cloud regions] | [None] | |
| Roles | Controller and processor | [None] | |
| Interfaces | [Payment provider, cloud provider, parent group HR system] | Processing inside those parties | Covered by contracts and supplier assessment |
An exclusion is acceptable only when it does not affect the ability to protect PII that is in scope. Record the effect of each interface in the supplier register (DOC-ISMS-066).
6. Privacy policy framework
| Document | Purpose | Owner | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| Privacy policy (internal) | Top management commitments for PII processing, objectives framework, roles | [@dpo] | [Policy ID] |
| Information security policy | Security commitments that also protect PII | [@isms-manager] | DOC-ISMS-001 |
| Public privacy notice | Information for data subjects where the organization is controller | [@dpo] | legal-lite/privacy-policy |
| Data processing agreement template | Processor commitments to customers | [@legal-counsel] | legal-lite/dpa |
| Data subject request procedure | Handling and assisting with rights requests | [@privacy-lead] | compliance/data-subject-request-procedure |
| DPIA procedure | Assessing high-risk processing | [@dpo] | compliance/dpia |
| Breach assessment | Deciding on notification of personal data breaches | [@dpo] | compliance/personal-data-breach-assessment |
| Retention and deletion standard | Retention periods and deletion methods | [@data-governance-lead] | data/data-retention-deletion-standard |
| Transfer assessment | Cross-border transfers | [@legal-counsel] | compliance/transfer-impact-assessment |
Manage all of them under the documented information rules in DOC-ISMS-028 so versions, approvals and distribution are consistent.
7. Relationship with the ISMS
Choose the model that fits:
| Model | When it fits | What is shared | What stays separate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stand-alone PIMS | No ISMS, or privacy is the main customer demand | Nothing required; the PIMS carries its own security controls for PII | All processes |
| Integrated PIMS and ISMS | Both systems built together | Document control, internal audit, management review, corrective action, competence, supplier management | Privacy risk criteria, privacy controls, DPIA, rights handling |
| PIMS added to a certified ISMS | ISMS already certified, privacy added later | As for integrated; the existing ISMS SoA covers most security controls for PII | PIMS SoA for privacy controls; scope may differ from the ISMS scope |
When the PIMS and ISMS both run:
- Keep one risk process (DOC-ISMS-010) with two lenses: risks to the organization and risks to data subjects. Privacy risks score impact on individuals, not only on the business.
- Keep one internal audit programme (DOC-ISMS-082) with PIMS topics planned explicitly, and one management review (DOC-ISMS-085) with a standing privacy agenda item.
- Map the security controls for PII in the PIMS SoA to the ISMS SoA (DOC-ISMS-011) so evidence is collected once.
- Align scopes or explain the difference. A PIMS that covers a service the ISMS excludes needs its own security evidence for that service.
8. Leadership, roles and responsibilities
| Role | Responsibilities in the PIMS | Holder |
|---|---|---|
| Top management | Approves privacy policy and scope, provides resources, chairs or attends management review | [@ceo] |
| PIMS owner (privacy lead) | Runs the PIMS day to day, maintains this document and the SoA, reports performance | [@privacy-lead] |
| Data protection officer (where required or appointed) | Advises, monitors compliance, contact point for authorities and data subjects; stays independent of operational decisions | [@dpo] |
| ISMS manager | Owns shared processes and security controls for PII | [@isms-manager] |
| Process and system owners | Operate controls for their processing activities and keep ROPA entries current | [@owners] |
| Legal counsel | Contract terms, transfer mechanisms, legal register | [@legal-counsel] |
| All staff | Follow privacy rules, report suspected breaches | All |
Record the full RACI in DOC-ISMS-006 and the competence requirements in DOC-ISMS-026.
9. Certification route
Certification bodies for PIMS work to ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 together with ISO/IEC 27706:2025, which replaced ISO/IEC TS 27006-2:2021. When you select a body (DOC-ISMS-090):
- Confirm it is accredited for ISO/IEC 27701:2025 by an accreditation body that is a signatory of the Global ACI MRA (formerly the IAF MLA). Global ACI replaced IAF and ILAC on 2026-01-01 and existing recognition continues. Check the certificate scope in the IAF CertSearch database (still operating at the time of writing; check).
- Ask whether it can run combined or integrated audits with your ISO/IEC 27001 certification and how it calculates audit time for each.
- Ask how it handles a scope that differs between the ISMS and the PIMS.
The cycle follows ISO/IEC 17021-1: a two-stage initial audit, a three-year certificate, surveillance audits at least once each calendar year outside recertification years (the first no later than 12 months after the certification decision), and recertification before expiry. Audit time is set by the certification body; any figure in your plan is an Example.
10. Size tiers
| Topic | Small: Quillmere Analytics Ltd | Medium: Quillmere Health Systems | Large: Quillmere Group |
|---|---|---|---|
| Profile | 46 staff (38 employees, 8 contractors), B2B SaaS analytics, processor for customer data | 320 staff, clinical scheduling software and managed service, two offices and a colocation suite | 2,400 staff, 6 sites in 4 countries, manufacturing and services, OT and IT |
| Main roles | Processor for customer data; controller for staff and customer contacts | Processor for hospitals; controller for staff and marketing data | Mainly controller (staff, customers, suppliers); processor for some group service centre activities |
| PIMS model | PIMS processes designed into the ISMS being built (ISO/IEC 27001 target 6 months); PIMS certification a later option (Example) | PIMS added to the ISMS the year after ISO/IEC 27001 certification (27001 target 10 months) | Integrated management system with ISO 9001 and ISO 22301; PIMS phased by site after the group ISMS (27001 target 15 months) (Example) |
| Ownership | ISMS manager (0.5 FTE, Head of Engineering Operations) also acts as privacy lead; external DPO service | Full-time ISMS manager, 3-person security team, appointed DPO, privacy lead in legal | CISO with a 14-person security office, group DPO, privacy coordinators per country |
| Inventory size | About 10 to 15 processing activities (Example) | About 40 to 60 activities (Example) | Several hundred activities, inventoried per site (Example) |
| Typical pitfall | Treating telemetry use as processor activity | Hospital contracts with different instructions per customer | Different national laws and works council rules across 4 countries |
11. Records and evidence
| Record | Proves | Owner | Location | Retention |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Approved versions of this document | Scope and roles are controlled | [@privacy-lead] | [Document system] | Current plus [3] years (Example) |
| ROPA with role per activity | Roles determined per activity | [@privacy-lead] | [Register] | Current plus [3] years (Example) |
| Context and interested parties review minutes | Issues and requirements reviewed | [@privacy-lead] | [Meeting records] | [3] years (Example) |
| DPO appointment and contact publication | Role assigned | [@ceo] | [HR file, website] | Duration of appointment plus [3] years (Example) |
| Management review minutes with privacy item | Leadership oversight | [@isms-manager] | DOC-ISMS-085 | [3] years (Example) |
| Certification body correspondence | Audit planning and scope agreed | [@privacy-lead] | [Audit folder] | Certificate cycle plus [3] years (Example) |
Add each record to the control evidence matrix (isms/control-evidence-matrix,
DOC-ISMS-033) so internal audit and the certification body find it in
one place. Set retention periods in line with
data/data-retention-deletion-standard.
12. Review and maintenance
Review this document at least every 12 months and when any of these happens:
- a new product, feature or customer segment that processes PII;
- entry into a new country or a change of hosting region;
- a merger, acquisition or divestment;
- a change in a privacy law that applies to the organization;
- a significant personal data breach or an audit finding about scope or roles;
- a new edition or amendment of ISO/IEC 27701.
Record the review outcome in the revision history, even when nothing changes.
13. References
| Reference | Edition | Use |
|---|---|---|
| ISO/IEC 27701:2025, https://www.iso.org/standard/85819.html | Second edition, 2025 | PIMS requirements and controls |
| ISO/IEC 27706:2025, https://www.iso.org/standard/82894.html | 2025 | Requirements for PIMS certification bodies |
| ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015, https://www.iso.org/standard/61651.html | 2015 | Certification audit process |
| ISO/IEC 29100:2024, https://www.iso.org/standard/85938.html | 2024 | Privacy framework, actors and principles |
| ISO/IEC 27001:2022 + Amd 1:2024, https://www.iso.org/standard/82875.html and https://www.iso.org/standard/88435.html | Current | ISMS requirements when both systems run |
| ISO/IEC 27018:2025, https://www.iso.org/standard/88150.html | 2025 | Public cloud PII processors |
| GDPR, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 | As amended; check the consolidated text | Example of a privacy law with controller and processor duties |
| Related templates | isms/pims-27701-statement-of-applicability, compliance/gdpr-ropa, compliance/dpia, compliance/ms-scope, isms/isms-context-interested-parties, isms/isms-roles-raci, isms/certification-body-selection, isms/cloud-pii-27018-processor, isms/control-evidence-matrix |
Standard and licence note
Structure aligned with ISO/IEC 27701:2025, ISO/IEC 27706:2025 and ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015, with links to ISO/IEC 27001:2022 + Amd 1:2024 and ISO/IEC 29100:2024. The tables, decision flow, scope wording and examples are original text; no text, control wording or tables from ISO/IEC standards are reproduced, and clause and annex references are left for you to confirm in the official standard, which you need to implement the requirements. Check the current edition of each standard and any transition rules of your certification body before use. GDPR is cited as an example only.
Template licence: MIT.
Modèles associés
PIMS Statement of Applicability Template (ISO/IEC 27701:2025)
PIMS SoA for ISO/IEC 27701:2025: controller, processor and security control matrices, decision rules, exclusions, GDPR article mapping example
SMSI & ISO/IEC 27001ISMS Roles, Responsibilities and RACI Template (ISO/IEC 27001 5.3)
ISMS role definitions, authorities and decision rights, RACI for clauses 4 to 10 and Annex A, audit independence, deputies, combined-role guardrails
SMSI & ISO/IEC 27001ISMS Scope Extension and Multi-Site Plan Template (ISO/IEC 27001)
Scope change classification, ISMS impact by clause, multi-site eligibility, site register and sampling groups, site readiness checklist, CB notification log, timeline