At Contoso, a senior manager claims: “The AI council should be responsible for doing model selection, prompt tuning, and code reviews on every AI…

The primary role of an AI council is strategic, not tactical. It should focus on establishing enterprise-wide AI strategy, governance, ethical principles, and risk management frameworks. The council's purpose is to enable and guide, not to become a centralized bottleneck for the technical execution of every project. Micromanaging tasks like prompt tuning and code reviews would stifle innovation, disempower project teams, and prevent the council from focusing on its critical strategic responsibilities. It should define the standards and best practices that teams then use to execute their projects.

(Assuming options are A: Yes, B: No, C: Yes, for critical projects, D: No, it's IT's role)

A. This conflates strategic governance with tactical execution, which is an anti-pattern for an effective governing body.

C. While the council might review critical projects for strategic alignment, performing the hands-on technical work is still inappropriate and unscalable.

D. While IT is involved in execution, accountability for technical quality lies with the project team, operating within the council's framework.

1. Microsoft AI Business School, "AI Governance and Ethics." The curriculum defines the role of a governance body (like an AI council) as setting policies, standards, and ethical guardrails, not performing day-to-day development tasks. (Reference: Module on "Responsible AI").

2. Microsoft Cloud Adoption Framework for Azure, "Organize for AI." This documentation describes the function of a Cloud Center of Excellence (CCoE) or similar body as providing governance, brokerage, and enablement, distinct from the project-level "doers" in application/development teams. (Reference: Section on "AI team structures and roles").