Free Isaca CGEIT Practice Exam with Questions & Answers | Set: 4

Reviewing the information governance framework should be the CIO’s primary focus before the migration, because it will help the CIO to ensure that the enterprise’s data and applications are secure, compliant, and aligned with the business objectives and policies in the cloud environment. The information governance framework defines the roles, responsibilities, processes, standards, and metrics for managing information assets across the enterprise. It also covers aspects such as data classification, data quality, data protection, data retention, data sovereignty, and data privacy. By reviewing the information governance framework, the CIO can identify the requirements, risks, and gaps that need to be addressed before moving to the cloud. The other options are not as important as reviewing the information governance framework, because they are either dependent on or secondary to it. Selecting best-of-breed cloud offerings is a tactical decision that should be based on the information governance framework and the enterprise architecture. Updating the enterprise architecture repository is a good practice, but not a primary focus before the migration. It can be done after the migration to reflect the changes in the IT landscape. Conducting IT staff training to manage cloud workloads is a necessary step, but not a primary focus before the migration. It can be done in parallel with or after the migration to ensure that the IT staff have the skills and knowledge to operate and optimize the cloud environment. References := Migration environment planning checklist, Practical Guide to Cloud Governance, Governance or compliance strategy

A vendor risk assessment is the most important consideration when integrating a new vendor with an ERP system, because it helps to identify and evaluate the potential risks or hazards associated with the vendor’s operations and products and their impact on the organization. A vendor risk assessment can cover aspects such as security, compliance, quality, reliability, performance, and contingency plans. By conducting a vendor risk assessment, the organization can mitigate the risks and ensure a smooth and secure integration with the ERP system. The other options are not as important as a vendor risk assessment, because they are either dependent on or secondary to it. IT senior management selects the vendor based on the results of the vendor risk assessment and other criteria. ERP data mapping is approved by the enterprise architect afterthe vendor risk assessment confirms that the vendor’s data is compatible and consistent with the ERP system. Procurement provides the terms of the contract after the vendor risk assessment validates that the vendor meets the organizational standards and obligations. References := Guide to Vendor Risk Assessment, 10 Risk Assessment Factors for ERP System Integration Projects, Ensuring Vendor Compliance and Third-Party Risk Mitigation

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

The CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, in its Governance of Enterprise IT domain, describes well-established IT governance as a culture where IT aligns with business objectives and is embedded in organizational processes. Awareness of IT metrics throughout the organization indicates that governance is ingrained, as employees at all levels understand and use metrics (e.g., KPIs, KRIs) to guide decisions. This reflects a mature governance culture. The manual likely references COBIT 2019’s EDM01-Ensured Governance Framework Setting and Maintenance, which emphasizes cultural integration of governance.

Option A: Benefits realized is an outcome, not an indication of cultural establishment.

Option C: Project assessment definitions are procedural, not cultural.

Option D: Balanced scorecard metrics are specific and not as broad as organization-wide metric awareness.

Double Verification: The answer aligns with COBIT’s EDM01 and the CGEIT domain’s focus on governance culture. Metric awareness is a key ISACA indicator of governance maturity.

ISACA CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, Domain 1: Governance of Enterprise IT (focus on governance culture).

COBIT 2019, EDM01-Ensured Governance Framework Setting and Maintenance.

ISACA Glossary (for definitions of IT governance), available at https://www.isaca.org/resources/glossary.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

The CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, in its Governance of Enterprise IT domain, emphasizes monitoring IT resource performance to ensure alignment with business expectations. Performance monitoring requires clear, measurable criteria tied to service delivery.

Option D: Service level requirements is the most important to consider. These requirements, often defined in service level agreements (SLAs), specify performance metrics (e.g., uptime, response time) that IT resources must meet to support business operations. Monitoring against these requirements ensures IT delivers expected value. For example, if an SLA requires 99.9% system availability, performance monitoring focuses on this metric. The manual likely references COBIT 2019’s APO09-Managed Service Agreements, which prioritizes service level monitoring.

Option A: Business impact analysis (BIA) assesses disruption impacts, not ongoing performance.

Option B: End-user feedback is valuable but subjective and less precise than service level metrics.

Option C: Centralized log analysis supports security and troubleshooting, not direct performance monitoring.

Double Verification: The answer aligns with COBIT’s APO09 and the CGEIT domain’s focus on service management. Service level requirements are the primary benchmark for IT performance in ISACA’s frameworks.

ISACA CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, Domain 1: Governance of Enterprise IT (focus on service performance monitoring).

COBIT 2019, APO09-Managed Service Agreements.

ISACA Glossary (for definitions of service level requirements), available at https://www.isaca.org/resources/glossary.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

The CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, in its Strategic Management domain, emphasizes aligning IT initiatives like ERP upgrades with business objectives through thorough planning and requirements analysis. A successful ERP implementation requires understanding business needs to ensure the system supports competitive goals.

Option D: Conducting a comprehensive requirements review is the most helpful. This involves gathering and analyzing business and functional requirements to ensure the new ERP system meets current and future needs (e.g., scalability, integration). For example, a requirements review identifies critical processes (e.g., supply chain management) and ensures the ERP aligns with industry demands. The manual likely references COBIT 2019’s BAI02-Managed Requirements Definition, which prioritizes requirements analysis for successful IT projects.

Option A: Documenting the current ERP processes and procedures is useful for baseline understanding but doesn’t ensure the new system meets future needs.

Option B: Reviewing the ERP post-implementation report is irrelevant, as it applies to past implementations, not the current upgrade.

Option C: Establishing a change and transition planning process is important but secondary to defining requirements, as change management follows requirements.

Double Verification: The answer aligns with COBIT’s BAI02 and the CGEIT domain’s focus on strategic project planning. Requirements review is a foundational step in ISACA’s project management guidance.

ISACA CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, Domain 1: Governance of Enterprise IT (focus on strategic IT project planning).

COBIT 2019, BAI02-Managed Requirements Definition.

ISACA Glossary (for definitions of ERP and requirements review), available at https://www.isaca.org/resources/glossary.

A data protection impact assessment (DPIA) is designed to identify and mitigate risks to data privacy. The CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition states that the primary objective of a DPIA is to analyze how business processes affect data privacy, particularly for personal data.

Extract from CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition (Domain 3: Risk Optimization):"The primary objective of a data protection impact assessment is to identify and analyze how business processes, systems, or projects may impact the privacy of personal data. This helps ensure compliance with data protection regulations and mitigates privacy risks." (Approximate reference: Domain 3, Section on Data Privacy and Compliance)

Identifying and analyzing how data privacy might be affected by business processes (option A) is the core purpose of a DPIA, aligning with regulatory requirements like GDPR.

Why not the other options?

B. To evaluate the quality and integrity of personal data stored in an enterprise: Data quality is a separate concern, not the focus of a DPIA.

C. To estimate the value created by personal data as it progresses through its life cycle: Value estimation is a business analysis, not a DPIA objective.

D. To ensure key business processes and related data interfaces are documented: Documentation may be a byproduct, but it is not the primary objective.

The best way for an enterprise to address new legal and regulatory requirements applicable to IT is to treat them as a risk to be assessed before developing a response. This approach involves identifying the potential impact of the new requirements on the organization, evaluating the likelihood and consequences of non-compliance, and then developing a prioritized response plan based on this risk assessment. This method ensures a measured and proportional response that aligns with the organization's risk appetite and strategic objectives. While benchmarking, adopting a zero-tolerance approach, and using cost-benefit analysis are useful, they should be part of a broader risk-based strategy to address compliance effectively.

Enterprise architecture (EA) is the most useful in developing IT strategic plans aligned with technological needs because it provides a holistic view of the current and desired state of the organization, including its business processes, information systems, data, applications, infrastructure, and security. EA helps to align the organization’s vision, strategy, and goals with its IT capabilities and resources. EA also helps to identify the gaps, risks, and opportunities for improvement in the existing IT environment and to design and implement the optimal IT solutions that can support the business needs and objectives. EA can help to ensure that the IT strategic plans are consistent, coherent, and feasible12.

A business impact analysis (BIA) is a tool that helps to assess the potential impact of a disruption or change on the business objectives, processes, and functions. A BIA can help to prioritize the criticality of the IT resources and determine the acceptable level of risk and recovery time. A BIA can provide a basis for deciding how to allocate the budget, reduce the requirements, or contract external resources3. However, a BIA is not sufficient for developing IT strategic plans aligned with technological needs because it does not provide a comprehensive view of the current and future IT architecture and its alignment with the business strategy.

A business case is a document that describes the rationale and justification for initiating a project or investment. A business case can help to evaluate the costs, benefits, risks, and alternatives of different IT options and to communicate the value proposition to the stakeholders4. However, a business case is not enough for developing IT strategic plans aligned with technological needs because it does not provide a holistic view of the current and future IT architecture and its alignment with the business strategy.

A benchmark analysis is a process of comparing the performance, quality, or practices of an organization with those of its peers or competitors. A benchmark analysis can help to identify the best practices, standards, or trends in the industry and to measure the gap between the current and desired state of an organization. However, a benchmark analysis is not adequate for developing IT strategic plans aligned with technological needs because it does not provide a holistic view of the current and future IT architecture and its alignment with the business strategy.

References := Implement Agile IT Strategic Planning with Enterprise Architecture, The Benefits of Enterprise Architecture in Organizational Transformation, Business Impact Analysis, Business Case, [Benchmark Analysis]

The first consideration with regard to the IT service desk that will remain centralized is the effect of regional differences on service delivery. This is because regional differences can pose various challenges and opportunities for the IT service desk, such as:

Language and cultural barriers: The IT service desk staff should be able to communicate effectively and respectfully with customers from different countries and backgrounds, and understand their needs, preferences, and expectations. This may require hiring multilingual staff, providing language training, using translation tools, or outsourcing some services to local providers1.

Time zone differences: The IT service desk should be able to provide timely and consistent support to customers across different time zones, and avoid delays or disruptions in service delivery. This may require extending the service hours, implementing shift work, using automation tools, or outsourcing some services to local providers2.

Legal and regulatory differences: The IT service desk should be aware of and comply with the local laws and regulations that apply to the IT services they provide, such as data protection, privacy, security, taxation, and consumer rights. This may require conducting a risk assessment, obtaining legal advice, implementing policies and procedures, or outsourcing some services to local providers3.

Technical and operational differences: The IT service desk should be able to adapt to the technical and operational requirements and challenges of the different regions they serve, such as network connectivity, bandwidth, infrastructure, devices, software, standards, and best practices. This may require conducting a feasibility study, investing in technology upgrades, implementing quality assurance measures, or outsourcing some services to local providers4.

The other options, identification of IT service desk functions that can be outsourced, enforcement of a standardized policy across all regions, and availability of adequate resources to provide support for new users are also important considerations for the IT service desk that will remain centralized, but they are not the first one. They are more related to the implementation and execution of the IT service desk strategy, rather than its design. They are also influenced by the regional differences factor, as they depend on the level of variation and complexity that the IT service desk faces in different regions. References := Five Ways to Provide a World Class Service Desk Experience, How to Run an IT Service Desk in a Hybrid or Remote World - Gartner, Best Practices for Building a Service Desk | Atlassian, The Top 18 Help Desk Metrics and Best Practices - HubSpot Blog

Risk management is the process of identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and treating the uncertainties that may affect the achievement of objectives. Risk management helps to ensure that decisions are made with an awareness of probability and impact, which means that the likelihood and consequences of potential events are considered and weighed against the benefits and costs of the actions. This can help to optimize the risk-reward balance, enhance the quality and consistency of decision-making, and support the achievement of desired outcomes. References:

CGEIT Review Manual 2021, Chapter 2: IT Risk Management, Section 2.1: Risk Management Overview, page 551

CGEIT Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2021, Question 1, page 152

The Benefits of Risk Management - PMI3

Effective risk management in IT governance requires that risk evaluation is embedded in the management processes of the organization. This means that risk evaluation is not a separate or isolated activity, but rather an integral part of the planning, execution, monitoring, and reporting of IT activities and initiatives. Embedding risk evaluation in the management processes can help:

Identify and assess the potential threats and opportunities that may affect the achievement of IT and business objectives

Align the IT risk appetite and tolerance with the enterprise risk appetite and tolerance

Prioritize and allocate the resources and actions to address the risks based on their impact and likelihood

Monitor and report the risk performance and outcomes in relation to the IT value drivers and benefits

Embed the risk culture and awareness across the organization

Requiring the business to help define IT goals is the best way to establish alignment between business and IT when the IT department has been operating independently of business concerns. This collaborative approach ensures that IT initiatives are directly linked to business objectives, facilitating strategic alignment and ensuring that IT supports and enhances business operations. While IT defining business objectives, business funding IT services, and both defining risks are important, the foundational step for alignment is integrating business perspectives into the definition of IT goals.

Information architecture is the design and organization of data and information assets in an enterprise, such as databases, documents, metadata, and taxonomies. Enterprise architecture (EA) is the holistic view and planning of the business strategy, processes, systems, and technology in an enterprise, such as business architecture, application architecture, data architecture, and technology architecture1. Aligning information architecture with EA means ensuring that the data and information assets are consistent, coherent, and supportive of the EA goals and objectives2.

The primary benefit of aligning information architecture with EA is that it enables the tracing of data to business functions, which means that the data can be linked to the business processes, activities, roles, and outcomes that use or produce it. This benefit has several advantages for the enterprise, such as34:

Improving data quality, accuracy, and reliability by identifying and resolving any data issues or gaps in the business functions

Enhancing data governance, security, and compliance by defining and enforcing the data policies and standards for the business functions

Increasing data value, usability, and accessibility by providing the data consumers with relevant and timely data for their business functions

Supporting data-driven decision making and innovation by enabling the analysis and evaluation of data for the business functions

The other options are not the primary benefit of aligning information architecture with EA, but rather secondary or potential benefits. Improving communication with senior management and the business is a benefit of EA in general, but not specific to information architecture alignment. Ensuring the adoption of enterprise data quality standards is a benefit of data governance, which may be facilitated by information architecture alignment, but not guaranteed. Facilitating appropriate access to data consumers is a benefit of data security and privacy, which may be improved by information architecture alignment, but not directly.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

The CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, in its Governance of Enterprise IT domain, defines roles and responsibilities for information security. The data owner is accountable for ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, and availability (CIA) of information, as they have authority over specific data sets and define security requirements. For example, a data owner for customer data ensures access controls and data protection measures are in place. The manual likely references COBIT 2019’s APO14-Managed Data, which assigns CIA accountability to data owners.

Option B: Lead legal counsel advises on legal compliance, not CIA.

Option C: Risk manager oversees risk but not specific data accountability.

Option D: Data custodian implements controls but is not accountable for CIA.

Double Verification: The answer aligns with COBIT’s APO14 and the CGEIT domain’s focus on data roles. Data owner accountability is a standard ISACA principle.

ISACA CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, Domain 1: Governance of Enterprise IT (focus on data roles).

COBIT 2019, APO14-Managed Data.

ISACA Glossary (for definitions of data owner), available at https://www.isaca.org/resources/glossary.

The success of an IT governance framework depends on its alignment with the enterprise’s unique business environment, including its goals, culture, and operational context. The CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition emphasizes that governance frameworks must be tailored to the enterprise’s specific needs to ensure relevance and effectiveness.

Extract from CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition (Domain 1: Governance of Enterprise IT):"The most critical factor for successful IT governance is aligning the framework with the enterprise’s business environment, including its strategic objectives, organizational structure, and operational needs. A one-size-fits-all approach is less effective than a tailored framework that reflects the enterprise’s unique context." (Approximate reference: Domain 1, Section on Governance Framework Design)

Aligning to the enterprise-specific business environment (option B) ensures that the governance framework supports business objectives, integrates with existing processes, and is accepted by stakeholders, making it the most important success factor.

Why not the other options?

A. Implementing an enterprise risk management (ERM) framework: While ERM is important, it is a component of governance, not the primary success factor for adopting the framework itself.

C. Complying with legal and regulatory requirements: Compliance is a requirement but not the most critical factor for overall success, as governance extends beyond compliance to value delivery and strategic alignment.

D. Using a globally accepted IT governance framework: Globally accepted frameworks (e.g., COBIT) provide a starting point, but without customization to the enterprise’s context, they may not be effective.