Isaca Certification CGEIT Passing Score

Integrating IT security policies into individual performance objectives is the best way to support the objective of driving a cultural shift to enhance compliance with IT security policies. This is because performance objectives are specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) goals that define what each employee is expected to accomplish and how they will be evaluated1. By integrating IT security policies into performance objectives, the enterprise can:

• Communicate the importance and value of IT security policies to each employee2
• Motivate and incentivize employees to comply with IT security policies2
• Monitor and measure employees’ compliance with IT security policies2
• Provide feedback and recognition to employees who comply with IT security policies2
• Identify and address any gaps or issues in employees’ compliance with IT security policies2

Integrating IT security policies into performance objectives can help to create a culture of accountability, responsibility, and awareness for IT security within the enterprise. It can also help to align the individual goals of employees with the organizational goals of IT governance.

The other options, communicating IT security policies on a regular basis, acknowledging and signing IT security policies by each employee, and centrally posting IT security policies with detailed instructions are not as effective as integrating IT security policies into performance objectives for supporting the objective of driving a cultural shift to enhance compliance with IT security policies. They are more related to the dissemination and implementation of IT security policies, rather than their integration and evaluation. They may not have a significant impact on the behavior and attitude of employees towards IT security policies, as they may not provide sufficient motivation, feedback, or recognition for compliance. They may also be perceived as passive, formal, or coercive methods of enforcing IT security policies, rather than active, informal, or collaborative methods of engaging employees in IT security policies. References := Performance Objectives - SMART Goals - BusinessBalls, How to Integrate Security Into Employee Performance Objectives, IT Security Policy: Key Components & Best Practices for Every Business …

 A common risk management taxonomy is a set of terms and definitions that are used consistently across the enterprise to describe, measure, and report on risks. A common risk management taxonomy is essential for integrating IT risk with the ERM framework, as it enables a common understanding of risk concepts, categories, and levels among different stakeholders and functions. A common risk management taxonomy also facilitates the aggregation and comparison of risks across the enterprise, and supports the alignment of risk appetite and tolerance with business objectives12. References: 1: Integrated Enterprise IT Risk Management (ERM) Programs - CohnReznick3 2: Introducing Risk Taxonomy - ISACA4

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 after the 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

• This is because moving all IT applications to an external SaaS cloud provider means that the organization is outsourcing the development, deployment, maintenance, and operation of its IT applications to a third-party vendor. This implies that the organization is relinquishing some control and ownership over its IT applications, and relying on the vendor to provide the required functionality, performance, quality, and security1. Therefore, the organization needs to shift its focus from delivering IT services internally to managing IT services externally. This involves the following activities2:

The shift from service delivery to service management can have a significant impact on the IT governance framework, processes, policies, and practices of the organization. It can also affect the IT skills, roles, and responsibilities of the IT staff and stakeholders. Therefore, the organization needs to adapt and adjust its IT governance approach accordingly to ensure that it can effectively oversee and optimize its IT services in a SaaS environment3.

The other options, the integration of the IT department with business lines, the improvement of IT service alignment with business, and the necessity to update key risk indicators (KRIs) are not as significant as the shift from service delivery to service management for moving all IT applications to an external SaaS cloud provider from an IT governance perspective. They are more related to the outcomes or consequences of moving to a SaaS environment, rather than the impact or change itself. They may also not be unique or specific to a SaaS environment, as they may apply to other types or models of IT service delivery as well.