A new governance-focused argument warns that boards and executive risk leaders should not postpone AI governance while waiting for perfect information. The core claim is that AI systems are already being adopted across organizations—via employee tools, engineering deployments, and embedded procurement terms—without formal legal or compliance review. The article calls for a senior, cross-functional AI governance committee with real authority and accountability, positioned for recurring reporting to the board rather than delegated to lower-level task forces. It specifically names functional “seats” including chief privacy, compliance, audit, security, and any chief AI officer. For higher education leaders, the operational risk framing is especially relevant as campuses scale AI in student services, advising, learning management systems, and admissions decision workflows. Governance lag can translate into policy gaps, data governance failures, and reputational exposure. The piece’s message is event-driven: AI adoption is moving faster than oversight structures, so governance must be built as a living framework.