A project lead wants to design an approval workflow for models moving between lifecycle stages. Which structure best fits good governance practice?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
You need stage-by-stage review with a named approver because risk changes as the model moves. A single early sign-off or shared approval doesn’t give real governance.
Full Explanation
The correct structure is a defined workflow that reviews risk and controls at each stage and records a formal sign-off from an accountable approver. Risk and context both evolve as a model moves through its lifecycle, so review needs to happen at each stage rather than being front-loaded into a single early decision. A single approval at project kickoff that is treated as covering every later stage is incorrect because a kickoff-only approval cannot reflect what has changed by later stages. An approval step that only activates if the model later triggers a monitoring alert is incorrect because waiting for a monitoring alert means review happens only after a problem has already surfaced, not before advancement. A workflow where any team member may sign off, since responsibility is shared across the team, is incorrect because shared, undesignated sign-off authority is functionally the same as having no accountable approver. For the exam, design workflows with stage-specific review and a named accountable approver.