Showing that a decision still holds after something changes.
After a model update, a retraining cycle, or a change in operating conditions, can your team show that a decision still acts within the mandate it was originally approved under? For most teams, the honest answer is no — and that is not primarily a monitoring problem.
Most teams can show that a system performs well. Far fewer can show that it is still operating within the scope and conditions under which it was originally approved. Performance metrics and continued authorization are two different questions — and only one of them is usually being tracked.
What changed
What actually changed about the system, its inputs, or its operating conditions since the last approval.
What was assumed
What conditions the original mandate depended on, and whether they still hold.
What can be shown
Whether continued authorization can be demonstrated to someone who was not involved in the original decision.