CAB

A CAB earns its time when it resolves uncertainty that a single team cannot resolve alone. Its members bring competing views of service impact, security exposure, customer commitments, capacity, and recovery readiness to a decision that has a named outcome. The chair owns the agenda and the standard of discussion; service owners own the business consequence; implementers own technical feasibility; risk and security leaders challenge assumptions that a delivery team may not see. The recurring failure mode is a meeting full of attendees but short on decisions, with a dense agenda, absent owners, and approvals granted because nobody can articulate the cost of delay.

This tag examines how to run the body rather than merely invite it. Coverage includes agenda triage, quorum, supporting evidence, standing review versus emergency sessions, external risk signals, and the moments when escalation is more honest than consensus. It treats a CAB record as a decision log: what risk was identified, what constraint changed the plan, who held authority, and what follow-up belongs after implementation. That perspective helps chairs remove low-risk routine work from the room while preserving deliberate scrutiny for changes that cross services, alter security posture, or leave little room for recovery. A strong board is selective, prepared, and willing to send incomplete proposals back for better engineering.