Template versions of these sample templates are available online at Operations Templates.

At a minimum, in creating the request for change (RFC) for the Change Initiation Review, the change initiator should refer to the online Operations Templates and complete the Request for Change template to the largest extent possible.

In order to take into account as much relevant input as possible during the review, it is critical that all Change Initiation Review team members receive this information in the link to the change log in the meeting details before the review. Although new information or additional action items might affect a team member's final decision, this preparation is essential for an effective review meeting. The information presented by the change initiator, in addition to that prepared by the other review participants, will be the basis upon which a go or no-go decision is made.

Participants in the review process should be prepared to comment on the change initiation with specific information from each of their respective functional areas. This information should include questions or comments on specific change details, applicable infrastructure policies and standards, business case, cost justification, impact analysis, affected configuration items (CIs), and operations and support requirements. If a change advisory board (CAB) is needed, each member should prepare a recommendation for discussion in the Change Initiation Review.

Each review team member should also complete the template for his or her functional area if required. Or the team member can consult the RFC information and consider where further clarification is needed before the change can be authorized. (See the online Request for Change template at Operations Templates.)

The templates provide a structure for determining whether:

• The change is cost-effective and has a business justification.
  
• The production environment (organization and infrastructure) is able to receive, support, and operate the change.
  
• The change details and plans are comprehensive and complete.
  

Team members fill in the template, including their reasons to authorize or reject the change as well as their preliminary go/no-go decision on authorizing the change. To accomplish this, they must compile evidence to support their decision. The following table lists some possible examples.

Table: Go/No-Go Indicators

Element	"Go" indicators	"No-Go" indicators
Change	Change is business-critical. Change is a legal requirement. Change will enable improved service. Change is suitably timed.	Change is not in line with strategy. No business case. Cost/benefits not adequately prepared. Change is not suitably timed.
Infrastructure Environment	Change aligns with established standards and policies. Change aligns with current infrastructure strategy. Staff members are skilled in the solution technology.	Established standards and policies not considered. Software suggested for the solution is unsupported (too new, too old) in the current environment. No support-staff training plan.
CMDB	Impact analysis indicates manageable change deployment. Critical services affected are managed for risk.	Inadequate impact analysis. Change will affect too many critical systems.