CRB Hacks: Decoding the Art of Leading Leaders to a Decision
March 27, 2025
Michael Benning
IpX Executive Director True North Calibration
Managing complex and high-impact changes effectively is far from simple. The Change Review Board (CRB) serves as a vital checkpoint, ensuring that proposed changes are carefully evaluated for their feasibility, risks, and alignment with strategic goals before moving forward.
Benefits
CRBs are about making quality decisions. Admittedly, a difficult thing to measure, but when they are well-managed and structured, they produce additional benefits too.
Reduction in Time to Market (TTM): A study addressing software projects in emerging markets found that effective CRBs can significantly reduce Time to Market (TTM) by managing requirements uncertainty and ensuring timely decision-making.
Below we explore a number of best practices and learnings we’ve identified in our experience implementing and improving CRB in the change process.
Establish the ground rules. Ideally, the ground rules and expectations of the CRB are well-documented and understood by participants, if not, this is the right place to start. Consider the following elements:
Participation: the reality is it can be difficult (if not impossible!) to find a time for all required attendees to participate – particularly in the short timeframe demanded by many high-priority Change Requests requiring CRB input. Personally, I prefer to set the expectation that unavailable leaders / stakeholders send a delegate. I like the message this sends to the organization – making a timely and quality business decision is important and it will be made with or without your participation. As a side benefit, attendance and participation can create an excellent development opportunity for delegates.
Decision making style: the point of the CRB is to make a business decision – are expectations clear regarding how that decision will be made? Is a consensus required, or perhaps a majority vote? In mature organizations, this is often not a big deal. For less mature organizations, decision-making can devolve into personalities and who is in the room at the time. I prefer identifying the one individual (in advance of the CRB) who will be tasked with making the required decision. The reality is some Change Requests are about customers and sales, others are about managing supply chain strategies, and still others have implications on long-term manufacturing strategies. Leaders with accountability for manufacturing, for example, should get more say in decisions where the primary impact is to manufacturing. Creating agreement up front can be the difference between an effective CRB and an ineffective one.
Prep the meeting. Some CRB meetings require lengthy discussion, but often the most effective CRB meetings take 10 minutes [bt1] (per change) because the meeting and the attendees have been well-prepped. If convening a CRB meeting is your responsibility, know that managers and attendees will recognize and appreciate a crisp meeting.
Establish clear objectives: what decision is required? Be precise. What are the impacts and risks – financial, technical, supply chain? Again, be precise.
Set an agenda: short is okay / good but have an agenda.
Distribute pre-read materials: provide participants with the Change Request documentation and a summary of proposed change(s), including impacts, costs, benefits, and risks (if not documented in the Change Request).
Invite the right participants: again, the CRB is about making a decision, not about creating action items. Include the leader(s) with the authority to approve changes and subject matter experts to provide the necessary background and answer questions. Avoid inviting unnecessary attendees to maintain focus and efficiency.
Use standardized templates: establish best practice templates for presenting Change Requests, including impact analysis and risk assessment (e.g., financial, technical, etc.). This creates efficiencies for those creating and consuming the CRB material.
Balance speed and rigor: being timely is important, but not if it impacts decision-quality. Avoid unnecessary delays in decision-making while ensuring proper due diligence.
Facilitate effectively: if it’s your CRB to lead, remember the decision is for the attendees, but the meeting is yours. You’ve prepped the meeting, and you know how this needs to go. Help the decision-maker(s) and stakeholders get there.
Stick to the agenda: avoid tangential discussions; use a parking lot for off-topic items to revisit later. If it’s not clear to you how a particular discussion impacts the decision, ask the group! I prefer to ask participants if they have any questions about the pre-read material (as opposed to reviewing it). It was distributed for a reason – establish the expectation that participants have reviewed it prior to the meeting.
Encourage balanced participation: you’ve asked leaders to participate in the meeting; ask them what they think. Create the expectation that leaders will voice their perspectives – particularly when they are not the decision-maker. Ensure that dissenting views are discussed fully. Managing dominating personalities can be a challenge. If you are facilitating, simply going around the room and asking for input can be an effective way to balance participation.
Focus on decision-making: define criteria for approval or rejection of changes, such as alignment with organizational goals, ROI, or risk mitigation. Encourage a focus on being data driven.
Summarize: document and communicate decisions. Clarify the ‘why’: this is the decision taken, and this is what drove it.
What a CRB is NOT: CRB meetings are about making quality decisions. It is nota design review. It’s not about updating stakeholders on the status of ongoing work and assigning action items. It’s not about making progress. It’s about deciding if the business case warrants approval of the Change Request; that’s it.
Who should be responsible for CRBs: experience and stakeholder management skills are perhaps the two most important qualifications to consider.
The right person has the knowledge and experience to understand the readiness of a change for CRB from a range of cross-functional perspectives. Are the requirements of the change fully understood, are the risks accurately accounted for, have the relevant issues been addressed fully. In short, is the Change Request mature enough to answer the reasonable questions that are likely to get asked by decision makers?
In addition, the right person has the required stakeholder management skills to deal effectively with complex changes and challenging personalities. This includes the ability and confidence to manage conflict in the CRB meeting. And often, conflict can be most effectively managed by avoiding an “ambush”: anticipating contentious issues and engaging key stakeholders in advance of the CRB to allow them the space to understand and prepare. This is a person with strong communication skills and understands the hot-button issues, and how functions in the organization are meant to work together.
Conducting a Change Review Board meeting is not just about reviewing requests – it is an opportunity to build a culture of accountability, collaboration, and strategic thinking. Aligned ground rules provide the structure necessary to ensure leaders and stakeholders understand their role and the decision-making process. Thorough preparation ensures that all stakeholders come to the table ready to engage with the right data and context. And effective facilitation ensures that meetings remain focused, productive, and inclusive, ultimately leading to quality decisions.
The next time you prep for a CRB meeting, think of it as an opportunity not just to approve changes but to shape the future of your organization.
Michael Benning, Executive Director of True North Calibration, brings over 25 years of experience in various project and operations management roles in the oil and gas and manufacturing sectors. Prior to joining IpX, Michael was the Director of Program Management and was tasked with establishing a Change & Configuration Management competence based on CM2 principles at a tier-1 automotive manufacturer. This global competency included 2 Change Leaders, 1 Change Implementation Leader, 2 Audit Release Analysts, a Director of Change Management, and had direct oversight to the CAD services team. In addition to rationalizing existing product portfolios, and integrating CM2 principles with legacy engineering and operations processes, the team implemented a configurator platform.
