[siliconc0w]

To challenge this a bit - this actually sounds like a bit of a dysfunctional culture where you have to handhold stakeholders in 1:1s or risk knee-jerk opposition to change. This isn't to say this doesn't work. It certainly works and there are many companies with this kind of culture that will pay you to do this well but it isn't a fast or scalable way of making decisions.

Ideally you can document the pros and cons of, say, moving to EBS storage vs instance backed and stakeholders give you comments with their concerns and you document and incorporate these and given enough stakeholders you can say, this is probably good enough for now and you trial using EBS-backed instances, improve your tools, document your learnings, and go from there. This can happen asynchronously, includes anyone interested, and can probably happen in around 1-2 weeks in a healthy culture. You do this so when there is the next EBS-outage you can point to this and say this was a deliberate decision and make an informed evaluation if the argument still holds rather than avoid going in reactionary circles. 1:1s don't document anything and only incorporate the views of people you think you should be consulted which is likely a subset of the people who want to be consulted.