Who owns the review cycle in your AI governance framework?

IAIM's template says most governance templates fail because they state principles but do not say who does what, or when the document will next be checked. It sets out nine sections, each with a named owner who is a person rather than a committee, and gives review and change control to the accountable executive. The review cycle it suggests is a fixed annual review plus four triggers: a change to a cited law or framework, a system moving into a higher risk tier or a new jurisdiction, a serious incident or near miss, and a new kind of system.

Read the briefing: AI governance framework template: the sections, owners and review cycle that make one usable

A question for the community: Who owns the review cycle in your AI governance framework?