An organization establishes a cross-functional AI governance committee including legal, engineering, compliance, and HR teams. What is the primary purpose of this approach?

Question

Options

• ATo accelerate AI deployment timelines
• BTo centralize technical decision-making
• CTo ensure diverse expertise and risk perspectives
• DTo reduce the need for external audits

• A
  4% (1)
• B
  4% (1)
• C
  92% (22)

Explanation

Including legal, compliance, HR, and engineering on a governance committee ensures that AI decisions are evaluated through multiple lenses - technical feasibility, legal liability, regulatory compliance, and workforce impact - which is exactly what diverse expertise and risk perspectives means. Option A is wrong because cross-functional review typically slows deployment (by design), adding checkpoints before launch. Option B is wrong because the structure deliberately decentralizes technical decision-making by bringing in non-technical stakeholders. Option D is wrong because diverse internal oversight complements external audits rather than replacing them - regulators often expect both.

Memory tip: Think of a governance committee like a roundtable where no single seat has all the answers. The word "cross-functional" is your signal - it always implies breadth of perspective, not speed or consolidation.

No community discussion yet for this question.