Leadership and Governance
Governance is decision rights, not meetings
Technology governance defines who decides what, and how accountability flows. Know the decision domains (architecture, investment, standards, prioritization), the committee structure (executive steering, operational, architecture review), charters that state scope and authority, RACI clarity, escalation paths, and performance reporting. Leadership content covers executive sponsorship, stakeholder engagement, adoption and change management, team development, and translating technical risk into business language.
Trap one: confusing governance with management. A steering committee sets direction, resolves conflict, and approves above-threshold requests; it does not triage tickets or design interfaces. Trap two: accountability cannot be shared. A RACI chart with three "Accountable" entries is wrong; exactly one role is accountable per decision. Trap three: assuming the CIO decides everything. Mature governance pushes decision rights to the level closest to the expertise, with a defined escalation route.
Rule of thumb: when a question asks how to settle a priority dispute between clinical leadership and IT, the best answer is rarely "escalate to the CIO." It is "apply the pre-agreed prioritization criteria inside the chartered governance body," so the outcome is consistent, documented, and repeatable.
Leadership questions reward transparency, documented criteria, and engaged sponsors over heroic individual intervention.