How to Easily Pass the Isaca CRISC Exam: Expert Advice

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide information about the level of exposure to a specific risk or a group of risks.

The most important factor to the effective monitoring of KRIs is determining threshold levels. This means that the acceptable or unacceptable values or ranges of the KRIs are defined and agreed upon by the relevant stakeholders.

Determining threshold levels helps to evaluate the actual performance and impact of the risks, compare them with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, identify any deviations or breaches that may require attention or action, and report them to the appropriate parties for decision making or improvement actions.

The other options are not the most important factors to the effective monitoring of KRIs. They are either secondary or not essential for KRIs.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 15

Information Technology & Security, page 9

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 7

 The FIRST thing that should be done when a KRI has remained below its established trigger point for an extended period of time is to recommend a re-evaluation of the current threshold of the KRI, because it may indicate that the trigger point is set too high or too low, or that the KRI is not relevant or effective in measuring the risk exposure. A re-evaluation of the current threshold of the KRI may result in adjusting the trigger point, changing the KRI, or removing the KRI. The other options are not the first thing that should be done, because:

Option B: Notifying management that KRIs are being effectively managed is not the first thing that should be done, because it may not reflect the true risk status and performance. A KRI that remains below its trigger point for a long time may not be a valid or reliable indicator of the risk exposure, and it may not capture the changes or trends in the risk environment.

Option C: Updating the risk rating associated with the KRI in the risk register is not the first thing that should be done, because it may not be accurate or consistent. A risk rating is based on the likelihood and impact of the risk, and it should be derived from a comprehensive risk analysis, not just from a single KRI. A KRI that remains below its trigger point for a long time may not reflect the actual likelihood and impact of the risk, and it may not be aligned with the other risk indicators and assessments.

Option D: Updating the risk tolerance and risk appetite to better align to the KRI is not the first thing that should be done, because it may not be appropriate or feasible. Risk tolerance and risk appetite are the acceptable level of risk exposure and variation that the enterprise is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, and they are determined by the executive management and the board of directors, based on the enterprise’s strategy and goals. A KRI that remains below its trigger point for a long time may not represent the desired or optimal level of risk exposure and variation, and it may not be aligned with the enterprise’s strategy and goals. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 121.

The three lines of defense model is a framework that describes the roles and responsibilities of different functions in an organization for managing risks and controls.

The first line of defense is the operational management, which is responsible for implementing and maintaining effective controls, identifying and assessing risks, and reporting on risk and control performance.

The second line of defense is the risk management and compliance functions, which are responsible for establishing and overseeing the risk management framework, providing guidance and support to the operational management, and monitoring and reporting on risk and compliance issues.

The third line of defense is the internal audit function, which is responsible for providing independent and objective assurance on the adequacy and effectiveness of the risk management and control system, and recommending improvements.

Within the three lines of defense model, the accountability for the system of internal control resides with the chief information officer (CIO). The CIO is the senior executive who oversees the IT function of the organization, and is responsible for ensuring that the IT risks and controls are aligned with the business objectives and strategies, and are integrated with the enterprise risk management and governance processes.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 20

Information Technology & Security, page 14

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 12

IT disaster recovery point objectives (RPOs) should be based on the:

B. maximum tolerable loss of data.

RPOs are determined by how much data loss an organization can withstand in the event of a disaster. It’s a measure of the maximum age of files that an organization must recover from backup storage for normal operations to resume after a disaster. Therefore, RPOs are directly related to the maximum tolerable loss of data.

 According to the IT Risk Management - Basics and Best Practices article, one of the best practices for IT risk management is to keep the risk register up to date. A risk register is a document that records the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, and status. A risk register is a vital tool for IT risk management, as it helps to track and monitor the risks throughout their lifecycle, and to communicate the risks to the relevant stakeholders. However, a risk register is only useful if it reflects the current situation and environment of the organization. Therefore, the risk register should be regularly updated to capture any changes in the risk profile, such as new risks, resolved risks, modified risks, or escalated risks. Updating the risk register will help to ensure that the risk management process is effective and efficient, and that the risk responses are appropriate and timely. References = IT Risk Management - Basics and Best Practices

The effectiveness of an IT risk management function depends on how well it can identify, analyze, evaluate, and treat the IT-related risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and performance. To achieve this, the IT risk management function needs to have processes that are updated and monitored on a continuous basis, so that they can capture the changes in the IT environment, the business context, the risk appetite and tolerance, and the regulatory requirements. Updating and monitoring the IT risk management processes also helps to ensure that they are consistent, reliable, and efficient, and that they provide timely and accurate information for decision making and reporting12. Aligning the IT risk management processes to an industry-accepted framework is important, but not the most important factor for the effectiveness of the function. A framework provides a common language, structure, and methodology for IT risk management, but it does not guarantee that the processes are updated and monitored on a continuous basis. A framework also needs to be customized and adapted to the specific needs and context of the organization3. Reviewing and approving the IT risk management processes by senior management is important, but not the most important factor for the effectiveness of the function. Senior management support and endorsement are essential for establishing the tone and culture of IT risk management, as well as for allocating the necessary resources and authority for the function. However, senior management review and approval alone do not ensure that the processes are updated and monitored on a continuous basis. Senior management also need to oversee and evaluate the performance and outcomes of the IT risk management function4. Periodically assessing the IT risk management processes against regulatory requirements is important, but not the most important factor for the effectiveness of the function. Regulatory compliance is one of the objectives and drivers of IT risk management, and it requires the function to adhere to the applicable laws, rules, and standards. However, regulatory requirements are not the only source of IT risk, and they may not cover all the aspects and dimensions of IT risk management. Moreover, periodic assessment may not be sufficient to capture the dynamic and evolving nature of IT risk. Therefore, the IT risk management processes need to be updated and monitored on a continuous basis, not only to meet the regulatory requirements, but also to address the other sources and impacts of IT risk5. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.1: Risk Response Process, pp. 121-123.

A risk register is a document that is used as a risk management tool to identify and track risks that may affect a project or an organization1. A risk register should be updated regularly to reflect the current status and changes of the risks, as well as the actions taken to mitigate or resolve them2. The most comprehensive information for updating a risk register would come from the results of the latest risk assessment, which is a process that involves identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks and their potential impacts3. A risk assessment provides a detailed and systematic overview of the risks, their sources, causes, likelihood, severity, and consequences, as well as the existing and planned controls and responses4. A risk assessment also helps to prioritize the risks based on their level of exposure and urgency, and to align them with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance5. Therefore, the results of the latest risk assessment would provide the most relevant and complete information for updating a risk register and ensuring that it reflects the current risk profile and situation of the project or the organization. Results of a risk forecasting analysis are not the most comprehensive information for updating a risk register, as they do not provide a complete picture of the risks and their impacts. A risk forecasting analysis is a technique that uses historical data, trends, and scenarios to estimate the potential outcomes and impacts of future events that may affect the organization’s objectives and performance6. A risk forecasting analysis can help to anticipate and prepare for the risks, but it does not provide specific information on the sources, causes, likelihood, severity, and consequences of the risks, nor the existing and planned controls and responses. A review of compliance regulations is not the most comprehensive information for updating a risk register, as it does not cover all the aspects and dimensions of risk management. A review of compliance regulations is a process that involves checking and verifying that the organization’s activities, processes, and systems are in accordance with the applicable laws, rules, and standards7. A review of compliance regulations can help to identify and mitigate the risks related to legal or regulatory violations, but it does not provide specific information on the other types and sources of risks, such as operational, strategic, financial, or reputational risks, nor the existing and planned controls and responses. Findings of the most recent audit are not the most comprehensive information for updating a risk register, as they do not provide a current and holistic view of the risks and their impacts. An audit is an independent examination and evaluation of the organization’s activities, processes, and systems, to provide assurance and advice on their adequacy and effectiveness. An audit can help to identify and report the issues or gaps in the organization’s risk management, but it does not provide specific information on the current status and changes of the risks, nor the existing and planned controls and responses. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.

 The BEST way to enable mitigation of newly identified risk factors related to internet of Things (loT) is to introduce control procedures early in the life cycle, because it can help to prevent or reduce the occurrence or impact of the risk factors, and to ensure that the loT devices and systems are designed and developed with security and quality in mind. The control procedures should include requirements analysis, design review, testing, validation, and verification of the loT devices and systems. The other options are not as effective as introducing control procedures early in the life cycle, because:

Option B: Implementing loT device software monitoring is a good way to detect and respond to the risk factors related to loT, but it does not enable mitigation of the risk factors, which is the proactive and preventive approach. Software monitoring is a reactive and corrective measure that may not be able to prevent or reduce the occurrence or impact of the risk factors, especially if they are embedded in the hardware or firmware of the loT devices.

Option C: Performing periodic risk assessments of loT is a necessary way to identify and evaluate the risk factors related to loT, but it does not enable mitigation of the risk factors, which is the action-oriented and solution-focused approach. Risk assessment is an analytical and descriptive process that may not provide the specific and effective measures to address or mitigate the risk factors, especially if they are complex or dynamic.

Option D: Performing secure code reviews is a useful way to verify and improve the security and quality of the software of the loT devices and systems, but it does not enable mitigation of the risk factors related to loT, which may involve more than just the software aspect. The risk factors related to loT may also include the hardware, firmware, network, communication, data, and integration aspects, which may not be covered or resolved by the code reviews. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 214.

 The most essential content to include in an IT risk awareness program is how to comply with the organization’s IT risk and information security policies. This will help to ensure that the staff members are aware of their roles and responsibilities, and that they follow the best practices and standards to protect the organization’s information assets and systems. Compliance with the IT risk and information security policies also helps to reduce the likelihood and impact of IT-related incidents and breaches, and to align the IT activities with the organization’s objectives and strategies. Populating risk register entries, prioritizing IT-related actions, and defining the IT risk framework are important aspects of IT risk management, but they are not the most essential content to include in an IT risk awareness program. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.1.1.2, page 2291

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 646.

Residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of risk responses. An effective risk management program should aim to reduce the residual risk to a level that is acceptable by the enterprise, in alignment with its risk appetite and tolerance. The reduction of residual risk indicates that the risk responses are appropriate and effective, and that the enterprise is achieving its objectives while managing its risks. The other options are not necessarily indicative of an effective risk management program, as they may depend on other factors, such as the reporting culture, the audit scope and methodology, and the nature and source of the inherent risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.3.1, pp. 24-25.

When selecting a risk mitigation option, management should consider the cost of control implementation, as well as the benefits and residual risks. The cost of control implementation includes the direct costs of acquiring, installing, and maintaining the control, as well as the indirect costs of potential side effects, such as reduced performance, increased complexity, or decreased user satisfaction. The cost of control implementation should be balanced with the expected reduction in risk exposure and the alignment with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. The maturity of the enterprise architecture, the reliability of key performance indicators (KPIs), and the reliability of key risk indicators (KRIs) are relevant factors for risk identification and assessment, but not for risk response selection. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Response, page 149.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, a risk action plan is a document that defines the specific actions, resources, responsibilities, and timelines for implementing the risk responses. A risk action plan should be developed after the results of a vulnerability assessment are shared with the relevant stakeholders, such as the business manager, to address the identified vulnerabilities and mitigate the associated risks. Developing a risk action plan is the next step in the risk management process, as it helps to ensure that the risk responses are executed effectively and efficiently, and that the residual risks are within the acceptable levels. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 201.

The organization’s information security manager is responsible for IT security controls that are outsourced to an external service provider. The information security manager is accountable for ensuring that the security policies and standards of the organization are followed by the service provider, and that the security objectives and requirements are met. The information security manager is also responsible for monitoring and evaluating the security performance and compliance of the service provider, and for managing the security risks and incidents that may arise from the outsourcing arrangement. The organization’s risk function, the service provider’s IT management, and the service provider’s information security manager are not responsible for IT security controls that are outsourced, as they have different roles and responsibilities in the outsourcing process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1.2, page 2461

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 651.

Strategic decisions on risk management are the decisions that involve setting the direction, objectives, and priorities for risk management within an organization, as well as aligning them with the organization’s overall strategy, vision, and mission1. Strategic decisions on risk management also involve defining the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, which are the amount and level of risk that the organization is willing and able to accept to achieve its goals2. The responsibility for strategic decisions on risk management should belong to the executive management team, which is the group of senior leaders who have the authority and accountability for the organization’s performance and governance3. The executive management team has the best understanding of the organization’s strategic context, environment, and stakeholders, and can make informed and balanced decisions that consider the benefits and costs of risk-taking4. The executive management team also has the ability and responsibility to communicate and cascade the strategic decisions on risk management to the rest of the organization, and to monitor and evaluate their implementation and outcomes5. The chief information officer (CIO), the audit committee, and the business process owner are not the best choices for being responsible for strategic decisions on risk management, as they do not have the same level of authority and accountability as the executive management team. The CIO is the senior leader who oversees the organization’s information and technology strategy, resources, and systems6. The CIO may be involved in providing input and feedback to the executive management team on the strategic decisions on risk management, especially those related to IT risk, but they do not have the final say or the overall responsibility for them. The audit committee is a subcommittee of the board of directors that oversees the organization’s financial reporting, internal controls, and external audits7. The audit committee may be involved in reviewing and approving the strategic decisions on risk management, as well as ensuring their compliance with the relevant laws and standards, but they do not have the authority or the expertise to make or implement them. The business process owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for a business process that supports or enables the organization’s objectives and functions. The business process owner may be involved in executing and reporting on the strategic decisions on risk management, as well as identifying and mitigating the risks related to their business process, but they do not have the perspective or the influence to make or communicate them. References = 1: Strategic Risk Management: Complete Overview (With Examples)2: [Risk Appetite and Tolerance - ISACA] 3: [Senior Management - Definition, Roles and Responsibilities] 4: Stanford Strategic Decision and Risk Management | Stanford Online5: A 7-Step Process for Strategic Risk Management — RiskOptics - Reciprocity6: [Chief Information Officer (CIO) - Gartner IT Glossary] 7: [Audit Committee - Overview, Functions, and Responsibilities] : [Business Process Owner - Gartner IT Glossary] : [Business Process Owner - Roles and Responsibilities] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Concepts, pp. 17-19.]

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite is the most influential factor when management makes risk response decisions, as it helps to define the boundaries and thresholds for acceptable risk levels, and to align the risk responses with the organization’s strategy, goals, and culture. Risk appetite also helps to balance the potential benefits and costs of risk responses, and to communicate the risk expectations and preferences to the stakeholders. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 192.

Engaging key stakeholders in risk management practices is the best way to embed risk management within the organization. This means that the risk practitioner involves and communicates with the people who have an interest or influence in the organization’s objectives, activities, and risks, such as senior management, business unit managers, employees, customers, suppliers, regulators, etc.

Engaging key stakeholders in risk management practices helps to create a risk-aware culture, align risk management with the organization’s strategy and vision, ensure the ownership and accountability of risks and controls, obtain the support and commitment for risk management initiatives, and improve the risk management performance and outcomes.

The other options are not the best ways to embed risk management within the organization. They are either secondary or not essential for risk management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 17

Information Technology & Security, page 11

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 9

A service level agreement (SLA) is a contract between a SaaS vendor and a customer that defines the quality and availability of the SaaS service, as well as the responsibilities and obligations of both parties. An SLA is most important to include in a SaaS vendor agreement because it sets the expectations and standards for the SaaS service, provides a mechanism for measuring and monitoring the service performance, and establishes the remedies and penalties for service failures or breaches. An SLA can also help to mitigate the risks and liabilities associated with SaaS delivery, such as data security, privacy, compliance, and disaster recovery. The other options are not the most important to include in a SaaS vendor agreement, although they may be beneficial or desirable depending on the context and nature of the SaaS service. An annual contract review is a process of evaluating and revising the SaaS vendor agreement to reflect the changing needs and circumstances of the customer and the vendor, but it is not a mandatory or essential element of the agreement. A requirement to adopt an established risk management framework is a way of ensuring that the SaaS vendor follows the best practices and standards for identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks related to the SaaS service, but it is not a specific or measurable term of the agreement. A requirement to provide an independent audit report is a way of verifying and validating the SaaS vendor’s compliance with the SLA and other contractual obligations, but it is not a direct or primary component of the agreement. References = SaaS Agreements: Key Contractual Provisions, SaaS Agreement: Everything You Need to Know, Essential checklist for SaaS agreement negotiations, Key Clauses To Understand and Evaluate in SaaS Contracts, SaaS Reseller Agreement: Everything You Need to Know

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric used to measure and monitor the level of risk associated with a particular process, activity, or system within an organization1. KRIs are typically used in risk management to provide early warning signs of potential risks and to help organizations take proactive steps to mitigate those risks. KRIs are designed to be quantitative and measurable, allowing organizations to track changes in risk levels over time and to identify trends and patterns that may indicate an increased likelihood of risk. A negative security return on investment (ROI) would be most beneficial as a KRI, as it would indicate that the organization is spending more on security than the value it is generating or protecting. A negative security ROI would suggest that the organization is either over-investing in security, under-utilizing its security assets, or facing significant security threats or incidents that erode its security value. A negative security ROI would alert the organization to review its security strategy, budget, and performance, and to adjust them accordingly to optimize its security ROI and reduce its risk exposure2. Current capital allocation reserves are not the most beneficial as a KRI, as they do not directly measure the level of risk associated with a particular process, activity, or system. Capital allocation reserves are the amount of capital that an organization sets aside to cover potential losses or liabilities arising from its activities. Capital allocation reserves may reflect the organization’s overall risk appetite and tolerance, but they do not provide specific information on the sources, types, or impacts of risks that the organization faces3. Project cost variances are not the most beneficial as a KRI, as they do not directly measure the level of risk associated with a particular process, activity, or system. Project cost variances are the differences between the actual and planned costs of a project. Project cost variances may indicate the performance or efficiency of a project, but they do not provide specific information on the risks that may affect the project’s objectives, scope, quality, or schedule4. Annualized loss projections are not the most beneficial as a KRI, as they do not directly measure the level of risk associated with a particular process, activity, or system. Annualized loss projections are the estimates of the potential losses that an organization may incur in a year due to various risk events. Annualized loss projections may help the organization to plan and budget for its risk management activities, but they do not provide specific information on the likelihood, frequency, or severity of risk events that may occur5. References = 1: Key risk indicator - Wikipedia2: What Is A Key Risk Indicator?3: Capital Allocation - Overview, Importance, and Methods4: Project Cost Variance: Definition, Formula, and Examples5: [Annualized Loss Expectancy (ALE) - Definition, Formula, and Example]

A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, and owners. The greatest concern when maintaining a risk register is that significant changes in risk factors are excluded. Risk factors are the internal and external variables that influence the occurrence and impact of risks. Risk factors can change over time due to changes in the business environment, the IT landscape, the threat landscape, or the regulatory requirements. If the risk register does not reflect the significant changes in risk factors, it may not provide an accurate and current view of the enterprise’s risk profile and may not support effective risk management decisions and actions. The other options are not as concerning as the exclusion of significant changes in risk factors, as they involve different aspects of the risk register:

Impacts are recorded in qualitative terms means that the risk register uses descriptive scales, such as low, medium, and high, to measure the potential consequences of the risks. This may not be as precise or consistent as quantitative measures, such as monetary values or percentages, but it does not necessarily affect the validity or usefulness of the risk register.

Executive management does not perform periodic reviews means that the risk register is not regularly evaluated and updated by the senior leaders of the enterprise. This may indicate a lack of management commitment or oversight for risk management, but it does not directly affect the quality or completeness of the risk register.

IT risk is not linked with IT assets means that the risk register does not associate the identified risks with the specific IT resources, such as hardware, software, data, or services, that are affected by or contribute to the risks. This may limit the visibility and traceability of the risks, but it does not necessarily affect the identification or assessment of the risks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.2.2, pp. 21-22.

A risk factor is a condition or event that may increase the likelihood or impact of a risk, which is the effect of uncertainty on objectives1. An information systems review is a process that involves examining and evaluating the adequacy and effectiveness of the information systems and their related controls, policies, and procedures2. The purpose of an information systems review is to identify and report the risk factors that may affect the confidentiality, integrity, availability, and performance of the information systems and their outputs3. The best way to ensure that the risk factors identified during an information systems review are addressed is to assign action items and deadlines to specific individuals, who are responsible and accountable for implementing the appropriate risk responses. A risk response is an action taken or planned to mitigate or eliminate the risk, such as avoiding, transferring, reducing, or accepting the risk4. By assigning action items and deadlines to specific individuals, the organization can ensure that the risk factors are properly and promptly addressed, and that the progress and results of the risk responses are monitored and reported5. Informing business process owners of the risk, reviewing and updating the risk register, and implementing new control technologies are not the best ways to ensure that the risk factors identified during an information systems review are addressed, as they do not provide the same level of accountability and effectiveness as assigning action items and deadlines to specific individuals. Informing business process owners of the risk is a process that involves communicating and sharing the risk information with the persons who have the authority and accountability for a business process that is supported or enabled by the information systems6. Informing business process owners of the risk can help to raise their awareness and understanding of the risk, but it does not ensure that they will take the necessary actions to address the risk. Reviewing and updating the risk register is a process that involves checking and verifying that the risk register, which is a document that records and tracks the risks and their related information, is current, complete, and consistent7. Reviewing and updating the risk register can help to reflect the changes and updates in the risk factors and their status, but it does not ensure that the risk factors are resolved or reduced. Implementing new control technologies is a process that involves introducing or applying new software or hardware that can help to prevent, detect, or correct the risk factors affecting the information systems8. Implementing new control technologies can help to improve the security and performance of the information systems, but it does not ensure that the risk factors are eliminated or mitigated. References = 1: Risk Factors - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics2: Information Systems Audit and Control Association (ISACA) - ISACA3: Information Systems Audit: The Basics4: Risk Response Strategy and Contingency Plans - ProjectManagement.com5: Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response, Section 3.1: Risk Response Options, pp. 113-115.6: [Business Process Owner - Gartner IT Glossary] 7: Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana8: Technology Control Automation: Improving Efficiency, Reducing … - ISACA : [Business Process Owner - Roles and Responsibilities] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.1: Risk Identification, pp. 57-59.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.]

Once a risk owner has decided to implement a control to mitigate risk, it is most important to develop a process for measuring and reporting control performance. This process helps to monitor and evaluate the actual results and outcomes of the control, compare them with the expected or desired objectives and standards, identify any gaps or issues that may affect the control’s effectiveness or efficiency, and report them to the relevant stakeholders for decision making or improvement actions.

An alternate control design in case of failure of the identified control is a contingency plan that can be used to reduce the impact of a control failure or breakdown. It is not the most important thing to develop after implementing a control, but rather a backup option that can be activated when needed.

A process for bypassing control procedures in case of exceptions is a mechanism that allows authorized users to override or circumvent a control in certain situations, such as emergencies, errors, or special requests. It is not the most important thing to develop after implementing a control, but rather a risk response that can be applied when necessary.

Procedures to ensure the effectiveness of the control are the steps or actions that are required to implement, operate, and maintain the control in accordance with the risk owner’s expectations and requirements. They are not the most important thing to develop after implementing a control, but rather a part of the control design and implementation process.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 13

Information Technology & Security, page 7

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 5

 The main benefit of involving stakeholders in the selection of key risk indicators (KRIs) is improving risk awareness, as it helps to communicate the risk exposure, appetite, and tolerance of the organization to the relevant parties. KRIs are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given operational risk1. By involving stakeholders in the selection of KRIs, the risk practitioner can ensure that the KRIs are aligned with the stakeholder expectations, needs, and objectives, and that they reflect the most significant risks that affect the organization. This also helps to foster a risk culture and a shared understanding of risk among the stakeholders, which can enhance the risk management process and performance. The other options are not the main benefit of involving stakeholders in the selection of KRIs, although they may be some of the outcomes or advantages of doing so. Obtaining buy-in from risk owners, leveraging existing metrics, and optimizing risk treatment decisions are all important aspects of risk management, but they are not the primary reason for involving stakeholders in the selection of KRIs. References = Key Risk Indicators; Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide; The 10 Types of Stakeholders That You Meet in Business; What are Stakeholders? Stakeholder Definition | ASQ

A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, and owners. A decentralized risk register is maintained by each business unit or function, while a consolidated risk register is maintained at the enterprise level. The greatest concern with maintaining decentralized risk registers instead of a consolidated risk register is that the aggregated risk may exceed the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an enterprise is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, while risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation around the objectives. If the risk registers are not consolidated, the enterprise may not have a holistic view of its risk profile and may not be able to prioritize and allocate resources effectively. The other options are also concerns, but they are not as significant as the potential misalignment between the aggregated risk and the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.2.2, pp. 21-22.

Information security risk factors are the sources of uncertainty that may affect the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of information assets within an organization. Information security risk factors can include threats, vulnerabilities, or impacts that may compromise the security of information assets. Information security risk factors should be mitigated when developing in-house applications, which are software applications that are designed, developed, and maintained by the organization itself, rather than by external vendors or providers. Mitigating information security risk factors when developing in-house applications can help prevent or reduce the occurrence or consequences of security incidents, such as data breaches, cyberattacks, unauthorized access, or data loss. The best way to ensure that information security risk factors are mitigated when developing in-house applications is to identify information security controls in the requirements analysis. The requirements analysis is the stage of the system development life cycle (SDLC) where the business needs and expectations of the application are defined and documented. The requirements analysis should include the functional and non-functional requirements of the application, such as the features, functions, performance, quality, reliability, and security of the application. Identifying information security controls in the requirements analysis can help ensure that the security requirements of the application are clearly specified and agreed upon by the stakeholders, and that they are aligned with the organization’s security policies, standards, and regulations. Identifying information security controls in the requirements analysis can also help ensure that the security requirements are integrated into the design, development, testing, and deployment of the application, and that they are verified and validated throughout the SDLC. Identifying information security controls in the requirements analysis can also help ensure that the security requirements are traceable, measurable, and manageable, and that they can be monitored and reviewed for effectiveness and efficiency. References = THE SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT LIFE CYCLE (SDLC), p. 2-3, System Development Life Cycle - GeeksforGeeks, 7.3: Systems Development Life Cycle - Engineering LibreTexts, What Is SDLC? 7 Phases of System Development Life Cycle - Intetics.

Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite provides the most important information to facilitate a risk response decision, because it reflects the organization’s risk tolerance, preferences, and expectations, which guide the selection and implementation of the risk response strategies. Risk appetite helps the organization to balance the potential benefits and costs of taking risks, and to align the risk management process with the organizational strategy and culture. The other options are not as important as risk appetite, because they do not indicate the organization’s desired level of risk exposure, but rather provide supplementary or partial information for the risk response decision, as explained below:

A. Audit findings are the results and recommendations of the internal or external audit activities that evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s governance, risk management, and control processes. Audit findings provide useful information to facilitate a risk response decision, because they can identify the gaps or weaknesses in the current risk response strategies, and suggest corrective actions or improvements. However, audit findings do not indicate the organization’s risk appetite, which is the basis for determining the optimal risk response strategies.

C. Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that measure the impact and likelihood of the risks, and provide early warning signs of changes in the risk exposure. KRIs provide useful information to facilitate a risk response decision, because they can monitor and report the performance and effectiveness of the current risk response strategies, and trigger corrective actions or adjustments. However, KRIs do not indicate the organization’s risk appetite, which is the basis for determining the acceptable level of risk exposure and performance.

D. Industry best practices are the standards, norms, and expectations for risk management that are established and followed by the peers or competitors in the same industry or sector. Industry best practices provide useful information to facilitate a risk response decision, because they can benchmark and compare the organization’s risk response strategies with those of the leading or successful organizations, and identify areas for improvement or innovation. However, industry best practices do not indicate the organization’s risk appetite, which is the basis for determining the unique and customized risk response strategies that suit the organization’s needs and goals. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.2, page 40. Risk Appetite: What It Is and How to Use It, Risk Appetite: How Hungry Are You?, Risk Appetite: The Strategic Balancing Act

 According to the CRISC Review Manual1, the business owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for the achievement of the business objectives and the management of the associated risks. The business owner is ultimately responsible for ensuring that the IT services and solutions support the business needs and goals, and for accepting or rejecting the residual risks after the implementation of risk responses. Therefore, the business owner should own the risk associated with calculation errors, as they are the ones who will be affected by the potential impact of the errors on the financial data and decisions. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 194.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, vendor risk mitigation action items are the specific tasks and activities that are assigned to the vendors or the organization to address the identified risks and implement the risk responses. The percentage of vendor risk mitigation action items completed on time is the best key performance indicator (KPI) to measure the effectiveness of a vendor risk management program, as it helps to evaluate the timeliness and quality of the vendor performance, the alignment of the vendor activities with the organization’s risk appetite and objectives, and the achievement of the expected outcomes and benefits of the risk responses. The percentage of vendor risk mitigation action items completed on time also helps to identify and resolve any issues or gaps in the vendor risk management process, and to improve the vendor relationship and communication. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 230.

According to Wikipedia1, a maturity model is a framework for measuring an organization’s maturity, or that of a business function within an organization, with maturity being defined as a measurement of the ability of an organization for continuous improvement in a particular discipline. A maturity model will best indicate the effectiveness and efficiency of an organization or a business function, as it helps to evaluate how well they achieve their intended objectives with minimum resources, time, and cost. A maturity model also helps to identify and prioritize the areas and opportunities for improvement, and to establish and communicate the standards and best practices for the discipline. References = Wikipedia1

The second line of defense is a group of functions that provide oversight, guidance, and monitoring of the risk management activities of the first line of defense. The second line of defense includes risk management, compliance, and internal control departments. Their key responsibility is to monitor the effectiveness of the control activities implemented by the first line of defense, and to report any issues or gaps to senior management and the board. The second line of defense also supports the first line of defense by providing frameworks, policies, tools, and techniques to identify, measure, and manage risks. The other options are not the key responsibility of the second line of defense, as explained below:

A. Implementing control activities is the responsibility of the first line of defense, which consists of the business units and process owners that own and manage the risks associated with their daily operations.

C. Conducting control self-assessments is a technique used by the first line of defense to evaluate the design and operation of their own controls, and to identify and report any deficiencies or improvement opportunities.

D. Owning risk scenarios is the responsibility of the first line of defense, which is accountable for the risks inherent in their business activities, and for developing and executing risk response strategies. References = Modernizing The Three Lines of Defense Model | Deloitte US, The second line of defence: fit for purpose, not an uncomfortable fit | Knowledge | Linklaters, COSO’s Take on the Three Lines of Defense | ERM - Enterprise Risk Management, Three Lines of Defense | Risk Management - Schneider Downs CPAs, What is the Three Lines of Defense Approach to Risk Management?

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the percentage of systems with long recovery target times has decreased is the information that would have the most impact on the overall recovery profile, as it indicates that the organization has improved its ability to restore its critical systems and processes within the acceptable time frames after a disaster. The recovery target time, also known as the recovery time objective (RTO), is the maximum acceptable time that an application, computer, network, or system can be down after an unexpected disaster, failure, or comparable event takes place. The recovery profile, also known as the recovery point objective (RPO), is the maximum acceptable amount of data loss measured in time. A lower percentage of systems with long recovery target times means that the organization has:

Reduced the gap between the business requirements and the IT capabilities for disaster recovery

Enhanced the resilience and availability of its critical systems and processes

Minimized the potential losses and damages caused by prolonged downtime

Increased the confidence and satisfaction of its stakeholders and customers

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 174-1751

The security risk associated with wearable technology in the workplace is the possibility and impact of unauthorized access, disclosure, or use of the data or information that are collected, stored, or transmitted by the wearable devices, such as smartwatches, fitness trackers, or glasses, that are worn or used by the employees12.

The first step in managing the security risk associated with wearable technology in the workplace is to identify the potential risk, which is the process of recognizing and describing the sources, causes, and consequences of the risk, and the potential impacts on the organization’s objectives, performance, and value creation34.

Identifying the potential risk is the first step because it provides the basis and input for the subsequent steps of the risk management process, such as assessing, treating, monitoring, and communicating the risk34.

Identifying the potential risk is also the first step because it enables the organization to understand and prioritize the risk, and to allocate the appropriate resources and controls for the risk management process34.

The other options are not the first step, but rather possible subsequent steps that may depend on or follow the identification of the potential risk. For example:

Monitoring employee usage is a step that involves collecting and analyzing data and information on the frequency, duration, and purpose of the wearable devices that are used by the employees, and detecting and reporting any deviations, anomalies, or issues that may indicate a security risk5 . However, this step is not the first step because it requires the identification of the potential risk to provide the guidance and standards for the monitoring process5 .

Assessing the potential risk is a step that involves estimating and evaluating the likelihood and impact of the risk, and the level of risk exposure or tolerance for the organization34. However, this step is not the first step because it requires the identification of the potential risk to provide the information and data for the assessment process34.

Developing risk awareness training is a step that involves educating and training the employees and other stakeholders on the security risks and best practices associated with the wearable technology, and informing them of their roles, obligations, and responsibilities for the risk management process . However, this step is not the first step because it requires the identification of the potential risk to provide the content and objectives for the training process . References =

1: Wearable Devices in the Workplace: Security Threats and Protection1

2: 10 security risks of wearables | CSO Online2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

4: IT Risk Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

5: Continuous Monitoring - ISACA3

: Continuous Monitoring: A New Approach to Risk Management - ISACA Journal4

: What Is Security Awareness Training and Why Is It Important? - Kaspersky5

: Security Awareness Training - Cybersecurity Education Online | Proofpoint US

A disaster recovery test is a simulation of a disaster scenario that evaluates the effectiveness and readiness of the disaster recovery plan. The main purpose of a disaster recovery test is to ensure that the organization can resume its normal operations as quickly as possible after a disaster, with minimal or no data loss. Therefore, the most important objective of a disaster recovery test from a business perspective is to verify that all critical data can be recovered within the RTOs, which are the maximum acceptable time frames for restoring the data and systems after a disaster. If the RTOs are not met, the organization may face significant financial, operational, and reputational losses. The other options are not the most important objectives of a disaster recovery test, although they may be beneficial outcomes. Gaining assurance that the organization can recover from a disaster is a subjective and qualitative goal, while recovering data within RTOs is a measurable and quantitative goal. Discovering errors in the disaster recovery process is a valuable result of a disaster recovery test, but it is not the primary objective. The objective is to correct the errors and improve the process, not just to find them. Testing all business critical systems is a necessary step in a disaster recovery test, but it is not the ultimate goal. The goal is to ensure that the systems can be restored and function properly within the RTOs. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 197-1981; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 572

A root cause analysis is a process of identifying and understanding the underlying or fundamental causes or factors that contribute to or result in a problem or incident that has occurred or may occur in the organization. A root cause analysis can provide useful insights and solutions on the origin and nature of the problem or incident, and prevent or reduce its recurrence or impact.

Performing a root cause analysis is the risk practitioner’s best recommendation when the number of tickets to rework application code has significantly exceeded the established threshold, because it can help the organization to address the following questions:

Why did the application code require rework?

What were the errors or defects in the application code?

How did the errors or defects affect the functionality or usability of the application?

Who was responsible or accountable for the application code development and testing?

When and how were the errors or defects detected and reported?

What were the costs or consequences of the rework for the organization and its stakeholders?

How can the errors or defects be prevented or minimized in the future?

Performing a root cause analysis can help the organization to improve and optimize the application code quality and performance, and to reduce or eliminate the need for rework. It can also help the organization to align the application code development and testing with the organization’s objectives and requirements, and to comply with the organization’s policies and standards.

The other options are not the risk practitioner’s best recommendations when the number of tickets to rework application code has significantly exceeded the established threshold, because they do not address the main purpose and benefit of performing a root cause analysis, which is to identify and understand the underlying or fundamental causes or factors that contribute to or result in the problem or incident.

Performing a code review is a process of examining and evaluating the application code for its quality, functionality, and security, using the input and feedback from the peers, experts, or tools. Performing a code review can help the organization to identify and resolve the errors or defects in the application code, but it is not the risk practitioner’s best recommendation, because it does not indicate why the application code required rework, and how the errors or defects affected the organization and its stakeholders.

Implementing version control software is a process of using a software tool to manage and track the changes and modifications to the application code, and to ensure the consistency and integrity of the application code. Implementing version control software can help the organization to control and monitor the application code development and testing, but it is not the risk practitioner’s best recommendation, because it does not indicate why the application code required rework, and how the errors or defects affected the organization and its stakeholders.

Implementing training on coding best practices is a process of providing and facilitating the learning and development of the skills and knowledge on the principles, guidelines, and standards for the application code development and testing. Implementing training on coding best practices can help the organization to enhance the competence and performance of the application code developers and testers, but it is not the risk practitioner’s best recommendation, because it does not indicate why the application code required rework, and how the errors or defects affected the organization and its stakeholders. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 189

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The best way to justify the risk mitigation actions recommended in a risk assessment would be to focus on the business drivers, which are the factors that influence the organization’s objectives, performance, and value creation12.

Focusing on the business drivers means aligning the risk mitigation actions with the organization’s strategic goals, priorities, and values, and demonstrating how the actions will support or enhance the organization’s capabilities, opportunities, and competitive advantage12.

Focusing on the business drivers also means communicating the benefits, costs, and trade-offs of the risk mitigation actions to the relevant stakeholders, and showing how the actions will address the organization’s risk appetite, tolerance, and exposure12.

The other options are not the best way to justify the risk mitigation actions, but rather possible sources of information or guidance that may support the justification. For example:

Aligning with audit results is a way to validate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk mitigation actions, and to identify any gaps or weaknesses that need improvement34. However, audit results may not reflect the organization’s current or future business drivers, and may not capture the full scope or impact of the risk mitigation actions34.

Benchmarking with competitor’s actions is a way to compare the organization’s risk mitigation actions with the best practices or standards of the industry or market, and to identify any areas of improvement or differentiation56. However, competitor’s actions may not be suitable or applicable for the organization’s specific context, needs, or challenges, and may not align with the organization’s business drivers56.

Referencing best practice is a way to adopt the proven or accepted methods or techniques for risk mitigation, and to ensure the quality and consistency of the risk mitigation actions78. However, best practice may not be the most optimal or innovative solution for the organization’s unique situation, and may not address the organization’s business drivers78. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

2: IT Risk Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

3: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

4: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

5: Benchmarking IT Risk Management Practices, ISACA Journal, Volume 4, 2017

6: Benchmarking: A Tool for Improving IT Risk Management, ISACA Now Blog, March 27, 2017

7: IT Risk Management Best Practices, ISACA Journal, Volume 1, 2018

8: IT Risk Management Best Practices, ISACA Now Blog, January 9, 2018

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), a vulnerability is a flaw or weakness in an asset’s design, implementation, or operation and management that could be exploited by a threat. A delayed removal of employee access is a vulnerability, as it allows former employees to retain access to the organization’s IT assets and processes, which could lead to unauthorized disclosure, modification, or destruction of data or resources. A delayed removal of employee access could be caused by poor personnel management, lack of security awareness, or inadequate access control policies and procedures.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.5: IT Risk Identification Methods and Techniques, pp. 32-331

An IT risk profile is a document that summarizes the IT-related risks that an organization faces, as well as the information and actions related to those risks, such as the risk description, assessment, response, status, and owner. An IT risk profile is a valuable tool for managing and communicating IT risks and their impact on the organization’s objectives and operations. The best description of the role of the IT risk profile in strategic IT-related decisions is that it helps assess the effects of IT decisions on risk exposure. This means that the IT risk profile can help to evaluate the potential consequences and implications of different IT choices or actions on the level and nature of the IT risks that the organization faces. The IT risk profile can also help to identify and address the gaps or opportunities for improvement in the IT risk management process and performance. The other options are not the best descriptions of the role of the IT risk profile in strategic IT-related decisions, although they may be related or beneficial. Comparing performance levels of IT assets to value delivered is a technique to measure and optimize the efficiency and effectiveness of the IT resources and activities that support the organization’s goals and needs. However, this technique does not necessarily involve the IT risk profile, as it focuses on the output and outcome of the IT assets, not the input and impact of the IT risks. Facilitating the alignment of strategic IT objectives to business objectives is a technique to ensure that the IT strategy and plans are consistent and compatible with the organization’s vision, mission, strategy, and objectives. However, this technique does not depend on the IT risk profile, as it focuses on the direction and purpose of the IT objectives, not the probability and threat of the IT risks. Providing input to business managers when preparing a business case for new IT projects is a technique to support and justify the initiation and implementation of new IT initiatives that can create value or solve problems for the organization. However, this technique does not require the IT risk profile, as it focuses on the cost and benefit of the IT projects, not the risk and response of the IT risks. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 38-391; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 962; IT Risk Management Guide for 2022 | CIO Insight3; IT Risk Management Process, Frameworks & Templates4

IT risk scenarios are the descriptions or representations of the possible or hypothetical situations or events that may cause or result in an IT risk for the organization. IT risk scenarios usually consist of three elements: a threat or source of harm, a vulnerability or weakness, and an impact or consequence.

The best approach to use when creating a comprehensive set of IT risk scenarios is to map scenarios to a recognized risk management framework, which is an established or recognized model or standard that provides the principles, guidelines, and best practices for the organization’s IT risk management function. Mapping scenarios to a recognized risk management framework can help the organization to create a comprehensive set of IT risk scenarios by providing the following benefits:

It can ensure that the IT risk scenarios are relevant, appropriate, and proportional to the organization’s IT objectives and needs, and that they support the organization’s IT strategy and culture.

It can ensure that the IT risk scenarios are consistent and compatible with the organization’s IT governance, risk management, and control functions, and that they reflect the organization’s IT risk appetite and tolerance.

It can provide useful references and benchmarks for the identification, analysis, evaluation, and communication of the IT risk scenarios, and for the alignment and integration of the IT risk scenarios with the organization’s IT risk policies and standards.

The other options are not the best approaches to use when creating a comprehensive set of IT risk scenarios, because they do not provide the same level of detail and insight that mapping scenarios to a recognized risk management framework provides, and they may not be specific or applicable to the organization’s IT objectives and needs.

Deriving scenarios from IT risk policies and standards means creating or generating the IT risk scenarios based on the rules or guidelines that define and describe the organization’s IT risk management function, and that specify the expectations and requirements for the organization’s IT risk management function. Deriving scenarios from IT risk policies and standards can help the organization to create a consistent and compliant set of IT risk scenarios, but it is not the best approach, because it may not cover all the relevant or significant IT risks that may affect the organization, and it may not support the organization’s IT strategy and culture.

Gathering scenarios from senior management means collecting or obtaining the IT risk scenarios from the senior management or executives that oversee or direct the organization’s IT activities or functions. Gathering scenarios from senior management can help the organization to create a high-level and strategic set of IT risk scenarios, but it is not the best approach, because it may not reflect the operational or technical aspects of the IT risks, and it may not involve the input or feedback from the other stakeholders or parties that are involved or responsible for the IT activities or functions.

Benchmarking scenarios against industry peers means comparing and contrasting the IT risk scenarios with those of other organizations or industry standards, and identifying the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, or threats that may affect the organization’s IT objectives or operations. Benchmarking scenarios against industry peers can help the organization to create a competitive and innovative set of IT risk scenarios, but it is not the best approach, because it may not be relevant or appropriate for the organization’s IT objectives and needs, and it may not comply with the organization’s IT policies and standards. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 19-20, 23-24, 27-28, 31-32, 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 199

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

Risk mitigation procedures are the actions and plans that an organization implements to reduce the likelihood and impact of identified risks. Risk mitigation procedures should include the deployment of counter measures, which are the specific controls or solutions that address the root causes or sources of the risks, and prevent or minimize the potential losses or damages. For example, a counter measure for the risk of data breach could be encrypting the data or implementing a firewall. The deployment of counter measures should be based on a cost-benefit analysis, a risk assessment, and a risk response strategy. The other options are not necessarily part of risk mitigation procedures. Buying an insurance policy is an example of risk transfer, which is a risk response strategy that shifts the responsibility or burden of the risk to another party, such as an insurer or a vendor. However, risk transfer does not eliminate or reduce the risk itself, and it may involve additional costs or conditions. Acceptance of exposures is an example of risk acceptance, which is a risk response strategy that acknowledges the existence and consequences of the risk, and decides not to take any action to change the risk situation. However, risk acceptance does not mitigate the risk, and it may require contingency plans or reserves to deal with the potential outcomes. Enterprise architecture implementation is an example of a business process or project that may involve or create risks, but it is not a risk mitigation procedure itself. Enterprise architecture is the design and structure of an organization’s IT systems, networks, and resources, and how they align with the organization’s goals and strategies. Enterprise architecture implementation may require risk management activities, such as risk identification, assessment, and response, but it is not a risk mitigation procedure itself. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 151

The primary focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan should be that the risk response reduces risk to an acceptable level. A risk response action plan is a document that describes the actions or measures that are taken or planned to modify the risk, such as reducing, avoiding, transferring, or accepting the risk1. Validating a risk response action plan means verifying whether the plan is feasible, effective, and efficient in addressing the risk2. The main objective of validating a risk response action plan is to ensure that the risk response reduces risk to an acceptable level, which is the level of risk that the organization is willing to tolerate or bear, based on its risk appetite and risk criteria3. Reducing risk to an acceptable level means that the risk response actions can lower the likelihood or impact of the risk to a point where the risk does not pose a significant threat or challenge to the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance. Reducing risk to an acceptable level also means that the risk response actions can balance the benefits and costs of the risk response, and that they can provide a reasonable assurance of the risk management effectiveness and efficiency4. The other options are not the primary focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan, as they are either less relevant or less specific than reducing risk to an acceptable level. Quantifying risk impact is a component or element of validating a risk response action plan, not a focus of it. Quantifying risk impact means measuring or estimating the potential effects or consequences of the risk on the organization5. Quantifying risk impact can help to evaluate the severity and priority of the risk, as well as to compare the risk against the risk criteria and the risk appetite. However, quantifying risk impact is not the primary focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan, as it does not address the feasibility, effectiveness, or efficiency of the risk response actions, or the level of risk reduction that they can achieve. Aligning with business strategy is a secondary or incidental benefit of validating a risk response action plan, not a primary or essential focus of it. Aligning with business strategy means ensuring that the risk response actions are consistent and coherent with the organization’s goals and values6. Aligning with business strategy can help to integrate the risk response actions with the organization’s culture and governance, as well as to support and enable the achievement of the organization’s mission and vision. However, aligning with business strategy is not the main focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan, as it does not indicate the feasibility, effectiveness, or efficiency of the risk response actions, or the level of risk reduction that they can achieve. Advancing business objectives is a tertiary or indirect outcome of validating a risk response action plan, not a primary or direct focus of it. Advancing business objectives means contributing to the improvement and enhancement of the organization’s performance and results7. Advancing business objectives can help to create value and deliver benefits for the organization and its stakeholders, as well as to optimize the use of the organization’s resources and capabilities. However, advancing business objectives is not the main focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan, as it does not address the feasibility, effectiveness, or efficiency of the risk response actions, or the level of risk reduction that they can achieve. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.8, Page 61.

Control processes are the procedures and activities that aim to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s operations, the reliability of its information, and the compliance with its policies and regulations12.

The ongoing efficiency of control processes is the degree to which the control processes achieve their intended results with minimum resources, costs, or waste34.

The best way to determine the ongoing efficiency of control processes is to analyze key performance indicators (KPIs), which are quantifiable measures of progress toward an intended result, such as a strategic objective or a desired outcome56.

Analyzing KPIs is the best way because it provides a systematic and consistent method of evaluating the performance of the control processes, and identifying the areas of improvement or optimization56.

Analyzing KPIs is also the best way because it enables the organization to monitor and report the efficiency of the control processes to the relevant stakeholders, and to take corrective or preventive actions when necessary56.

The other options are not the best way, but rather possible sources of information or inputs that may support or complement the analysis of KPIs. For example:

Performing annual risk assessments is a way to identify and evaluate the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, and to determine the adequacy and effectiveness of the control processes in mitigating those risks12. However, this way is not the best because it is periodic rather than continuous, and may not capture the changes or trends in the efficiency of the control processes12.

Interviewing process owners is a way to collect and verify the information and feedback from the people who are responsible for designing, implementing, and operating the control processes12. However, this way is not the best because it is subjective and qualitative, and may not provide reliable or comparable data on the efficiency of the control processes12.

Reviewing the risk register is a way to examine and update the documentation and status of the risks and the control processes that are associated with them12. However, this way is not the best because it is descriptive rather than analytical, and may not measure or evaluate the efficiency of the control processes12. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

2: IT Risk Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

3: The Control Process | Principles of Management4

4: Control Management: What it is + Why It’s Essential | Adobe Workfront5

5: What is a Key Performance Indicator (KPI)? Guide & Examples - Qlik1

6: What is a Key Performance Indicator (KPI)? - KPI.org2

 According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the best course of action when a risk assessment has identified that an organization may not be in compliance with industry regulations is to conduct a gap analysis against compliance criteria, which is a method of comparing the current state of compliance with the desired or required state of compliance. Conducting a gap analysis against compliance criteria helps to:

Identify and evaluate the differences or discrepancies between the compliance requirements and the actual compliance practices and capabilities

Assess the impact and severity of the compliance gaps on the organization’s objectives and performance

Prioritize the compliance gaps based on their urgency and importance

Develop and implement appropriate actions or measures to close or reduce the compliance gaps

Monitor and measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the actions or measures taken to address the compliance gaps

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.5: IT Risk Identification Methods and Techniques, pp. 34-351

 Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite can be expressed in qualitative or quantitative terms, and can vary depending on the context and the stakeholder. Risk appetite should be defined and communicated by the senior management or the board of directors, and should guide the risk management decisions and actions throughout the organization. When a project team has accepted a risk outside the established risk appetite, the risk practitioner’s best course of action is to escalate the risk decision to the project sponsor for review, meaning that the risk practitioner should report the risk acceptance and its rationale to the project sponsor, who is the person or group that provides the resources and support for the project, and is accountable for its success. The project sponsor should review the risk decision and determine whether it is aligned with the organization’s objectives and strategy, and whether it requires any further approval or action. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.1, p. 25-26

The next thing that the risk practitioner should do from a risk management perspective when the organization is considering the adoption of an aggressive business strategy to achieve desired growth is to identify new threats resulting from the new business strategy. A threat is a potential cause of an unwanted incident that may affect the achievement of the objectives. An aggressive business strategy is a strategy that involves pursuing high-risk, high-reward opportunities or initiatives to gain a competitive advantage or a significant market share. An aggressive business strategy may introduce new threats or increase the likelihood or impact of existing threats, such as market volatility, regulatory changes, customer dissatisfaction, or competitor retaliation. Therefore, the risk practitioner should identify the new threats resulting from the new business strategy, and assess their potential consequences and implications for the organization. The other options are not as immediate as identifying new threats resulting from the new business strategy, as they are related to the update, information, or measurement of the risk management process, not the identification or analysis of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: IT Risk Scenarios, page 23.

 The most concerning issue for a risk practitioner reviewing an organization risk register is that several risk action plans have missed target completion dates. This indicates that the risk responses are not being implemented effectively or timely, and that the risk exposure may not be reduced as expected. Senior management accepting more risk than usual, risk associated with many assets being expressed in qualitative terms, and many risk scenarios being owned by the same senior manager are not as concerning as the missed deadlines, as they may reflect the risk appetite, tolerance, and culture of the organization. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 10; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 140.

The best way to increase the chances of a successful delivery of a new application and to assure the business management that IT has a plan in place for early identification of potential issues is to include business management on a weekly risk and issues report. A risk and issues report is a document that summarizes the current status, progress, and challenges of the IT project, as well as the actions and resources needed to address them. A risk and issues report helps to communicate and align the expectations and objectives of the IT and business stakeholders, and to facilitate timely and effective decision-making and problem-solving. A risk and issues report also helps to monitor and control the project scope, schedule, budget, and quality, and to ensure that the project delivers the desired value and benefits to the organization. The other options are not as effective as including business management on a weekly risk and issues report, although they may be part of the IT project management process or outcomes. Implementing a release and deployment plan, conducting comprehensive regression testing, and developing enterprise-wide key risk indicators (KRIs) are all activities that can help to ensure the quality and reliability of the new application, but they do not necessarily involve the business management or provide assurance for the early identification of potential issues. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 5-32.

The primary reason an organization should include background checks on roles with elevated access to production as part of its hiring process is to reduce internal threats. Internal threats are the risks that originate from within the organization, such as employees, contractors, or partners. Roles with elevated access to production have the privilege and ability to access, modify, or delete sensitive or critical data and systems. If these roles are assigned to individuals who have malicious intent, criminal records, or conflicts of interest, they may pose a significant threat to the organization’s security, integrity, and availability. By conducting background checks, the organization can verify the identity, credentials, and history of the candidates, and prevent or minimize the possibility of hiring untrustworthy or unsuitable individuals. The other options are not as important as reducing internal threats, as they are related to the outcomes, impacts, or requirements of the roles with elevated access to production, not the reasons for conducting background checks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

The best way to mitigate the high cost of retrieving electronic evidence associated with potential litigation is to implement policies and procedures for data retention and destruction. Data retention and destruction policies and procedures define the criteria, methods, and schedules for retaining and disposing of electronic data. They help to ensure that the electronic data is stored, managed, and deleted in a consistent, secure, and compliant manner. They also help to reduce the volume, complexity, and cost of retrieving electronic evidence, as they limit the scope, duration, and frequency of the data preservation and discovery process. The other options are not as effective as data retention and destruction policies and procedures, as they are related to the collection, analysis, or classification of electronic data, not the retention or destruction of electronic data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

 The key performance indicator (KPI) that best measures the effectiveness of an organization’s disaster recovery program is the percentage of critical systems recovered within the recovery time objective (RTO). The RTO is the acceptable timeframe within which a business process or system must be restored after a disruption. The percentage of critical systems recovered within the RTO indicates how well the disaster recovery program can meet the business continuity requirements and minimize the impact of the disruption. The other options are not as good as the percentage of critical systems recovered within the RTO, as they are related to the efficiency, quality, or scope of the disaster recovery program, not the effectiveness of the disaster recovery program. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Key Performance Indicators, page 183.

 Asset management is the process of identifying, tracking, and maintaining the physical and information assets of an organization. Asset management helps to optimize the value, performance, and security of the assets, and support the business objectives and strategies. The factor that would be of greatest concern regarding an organization’s asset management is an incomplete asset inventory, which is a list of all the assets that the organization owns or uses. An incomplete asset inventory may indicate that the organization does not have a clear and accurate understanding of its assets, their location, ownership, value, dependencies, etc. This may lead to various risks, such as asset loss, theft, misuse, damage, underutilization, overutilization, etc. An incomplete asset inventory may also affect the asset classification, protection, recovery, and disposal processes. References = 6

 Risk appetite is the broad-based amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite reflects the level of risk that the organization is prepared to take to achieve its strategic goals, and provides guidance and boundaries for the risk management activities and decisions. To define the risk management strategy, which is the plan and approach for managing the risks that may affect the achievement of the organization’s objectives, the factor that must be set by the board of directors is the risk appetite. The board of directors is the highest governing body of the organization, and has the ultimate responsibility and authority for setting the direction and oversight of the organization. By setting the risk appetite, the board of directors can communicate its expectations and preferences for the risk exposure and performance of the organization, and ensure alignment with the business objectives and strategies. References = 3