Challenge the work.
ITS is forming its founding Practitioner Exchange: small, multidisciplinary discussions where governance concepts are tested against how consequential systems actually run. Bring operational, legal, technical or policy experience. The point is external challenge, not agreement, and no prior knowledge of CI-AIGAF is expected.
The first exchange is being convened. Expressions of interest are open. No past sessions are implied.
A progression built on contribution
Practitioner Exchange
A small, focused discussion around one concrete governance question. No expectation that participants know CI-AIGAF or ITS frameworks in advance. The value is your operational judgement.
Focused Review
Review a selected section, concept, control, scenario or implementation artefact relevant to your expertise, and tell us where it does or does not hold up in practice.
Sustained Contribution
Repeated, substantive contribution to research, validation, practitioner notes, events, training, case development or co-authored work where genuinely appropriate.
Formal titles such as Fellows or advisers may emerge from sustained contribution over time. They are not automatic, are not offered in advance, and will never be implied before they exist.
Small, multidisciplinary discussions, not networking events
ITS convenes short, focused conversations around one difficult governance question at a time. A typical exchange is 30–45 minutes and needs no prior knowledge of CI-AIGAF, only operational judgement from your field.
The intended public output is an ITS Practitioner Field Note, a short record of the themes, points of disagreement, unresolved questions and implications for frameworks. It captures the challenge, not a consensus.
Join a practitioner exchange →
- Q1
When should operational authority be withdrawn from an AI system? First exchange question
- Q2
When does human oversight become too slow to matter?
- Q3
What evidence should be required before an AI system regains authority?
- Q4
Who is accountable when an authorised AI action is wrong?
- Q5
What can cybersecurity teach AI governance about revocation?
Expertise the Exchange brings together
Operational AI governance needs more than one discipline. ITS is building the Practitioner Exchange around people who see the problem from different operational, assurance, legal and research perspectives.
Operations & engineering
Governance & assurance
Research & public interest
People working in general AI governance and adjacent fields are welcome. What matters is the willingness to test ideas against how consequential systems actually run.
Participation does not imply that a contributor endorses ITS or CI-AIGAF, nor that ITS endorses the contributor. Contribution is treated as challenge, not endorsement. Public acknowledgement of any contributor is made only with that person's permission.
Tell us how you'd like to contribute
No prior knowledge of CI-AIGAF is expected. We will follow up about a suitable first step.
Contribution before title
Bring your expertise to a focused governance question. Sustained contribution, not a title, is how involvement grows.