- Home
- Isaca CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 2 Q21-40
Isaca CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 2 Q21-40
Visit here for our full Isaca CRISC exam dumps and practice test questions.
Question 21:
Which activity should a risk practitioner perform first when a business unit proposes adopting a high-risk emerging technology?
A) Approve conditional deployment and monitor risks
B) Conduct a detailed quantitative risk analysis
C) Facilitate a preliminary risk assessment with stakeholders
D) Escalate the proposal to executive management
Answer: C) Facilitate a preliminary risk assessment with stakeholders
Explanation:
In many organizations, the introduction of a high-risk emerging technology requires a structured evaluation before any decisions are made. The choice describing a facilitation of a preliminary assessment with stakeholders emphasizes the early engagement needed to determine whether the technology aligns with risk appetite, business goals, and controls already in place. Conducting this early assessment allows risk practitioners to identify immediate concerns, resource impacts, and potential exposure, establishing a foundation for more detailed analysis later. This initial step ensures that decisions proceed based on awareness rather than assumptions and avoids committing to a direction without adequate risk visibility.
The choice that refers to approving conditional deployment and monitoring risks focuses on allowing the business unit to move ahead, which is premature because the organization has not formally evaluated inherent and residual risks. Deploying a new technology before completing even basic due diligence may expose the organization to compliance gaps, security issues, and operational risk. Monitoring is beneficial only after adequate assessment and acceptance; thus this step is out of sequence compared to what should be done first.
The choice describing a detailed quantitative risk analysis suggests a rigorous study involving numerical modeling, data gathering, and assessment of probability distributions. While valuable in some scenarios, such analysis is time-consuming and not always necessary at the earliest stage. Before investing heavily in detailed analytics, stakeholders must first determine whether the technology is worth exploring further, which is best accomplished through preliminary assessment rather than deep quantification.
The option stating that the proposal should be escalated immediately to executive management lacks essential context. Senior leaders generally expect a risk practitioner to provide initial evaluation results, including identification of major concerns and alignment with risk appetite. Escalation without background analysis would result in incomplete information, making leadership decision-making less effective.
The most appropriate answer is the one emphasizing early collaborative assessment with stakeholders. This approach enables the organization to clarify objectives, identify potential exposure, and determine whether further analysis or escalation is warranted. It establishes structure around decision-making, ensures transparency, and prevents premature commitment to high-risk technology. For these reasons, the correct selection is the facilitation of a preliminary risk assessment.
Question 22:
A global organization plans to outsource data processing to a third-party provider in another country. What should the risk practitioner prioritize first?
A) Review the provider’s historical incident reports
B) Assess cross-border data transfer and regulatory requirements
C) Request the provider’s business continuity plan
D) Negotiate penalties for service-level failures
Answer: B) Assess cross-border data transfer and regulatory requirements
Explanation:
The choice involving assessment of cross-border data transfer and regulatory requirements is critical because outsourcing to a provider in a different country introduces legal obligations, privacy concerns, and compliance implications. These factors must be examined before the organization can determine whether outsourcing is permissible or advisable. Understanding relevant laws, including how personal data must be handled, stored, processed, and transferred, directly affects the organization’s risk exposure. A thorough regulatory assessment ensures alignment with legal mandates, contractual obligations, and the enterprise risk framework before operational steps proceed.
The selection referencing the review of historical incident reports emphasizes the need to understand a provider’s past performance, especially regarding security breaches or operational failures. While this analysis is important, it becomes relevant only after confirming that the regulatory environment permits the proposed outsourcing. If the arrangement violates cross-border data rules, incident history becomes irrelevant because the outsourcing cannot legally proceed.
The option about requesting the provider’s business continuity plan focuses on resilience, disaster recovery, and ability to maintain service levels. These aspects matter once an outsourcing relationship has been deemed legally sound. Evaluating the business continuity plan before understanding whether the data transfer is compliant misplaces priorities and may lead to assessing a provider the organization legally cannot use.
The choice that involves negotiating penalties for service-level failures pertains to contracting details. This step comes much later in the outsourcing lifecycle, after regulatory suitability, provider capability, and risk exposure have already been validated. Negotiating penalties before determining legal feasibility would be premature and potentially wasteful.
The best answer is the one emphasizing assessment of cross-border transfer requirements because legal noncompliance exposes the organization to severe penalties, reputational damage, and operational restrictions. This must occur first, before examining provider controls, resilience, or contractual terms.
Question 23:
Which factor is most critical when determining the appropriate risk response for a system that handles mission-critical financial data?
A) Available budget for control implementation
B) Organizational risk appetite and tolerance
C) Complexity of system architecture
D) Preferences of the technology operations team
Answer: B) Organizational risk appetite and tolerance
Explanation:
The choice referencing risk appetite and tolerance is central because any response to risk must align with organizational thresholds for acceptable exposure. When dealing with mission-critical financial data, the potential impact of system compromise, downtime, or data integrity issues is high. Organizations define risk appetite to guide decision-making and ensure that measures taken to reduce or manage risk are consistent with strategic objectives. Therefore, before selecting controls, transferring risk, or accepting residual exposure, the practitioner must verify that the response fits within these established boundaries. This ensures decisions reflect leadership expectations rather than individual team preferences.
The selection referring to available budget emphasizes financial constraints in implementing controls. While budget matters, it cannot override risk appetite for systems supporting critical financial operations. If risk exposure exceeds acceptable levels, budget should be adjusted accordingly rather than dictating risk decisions. Treating budget as the primary driver may result in inadequate protection and regulatory noncompliance.
The option involving complexity of system architecture acknowledges the importance of understanding how multiple components interact and where potential vulnerabilities may reside. Complexity affects technical feasibility and implementation effort, but does not determine whether a risk response is strategically appropriate. Architecture informs how controls should be deployed, not whether they should be deployed.
The choice about technology operations team preferences reflects internal viewpoints that may help shape operational practicality. However, such preferences should never dictate risk response strategy for systems handling critical data. Risk decisions must be grounded in enterprise-level guidance rather than departmentally driven convenience.
The proper answer centers on risk appetite and tolerance because they establish the thresholds that determine how aggressively risk must be mitigated and what level of residual exposure is unacceptable. For mission-critical systems, these thresholds ensure alignment with business priorities and regulatory expectations.
Question 24:
Which activity provides the most value when validating the effectiveness of recently implemented security controls?
A) Conducting a control self-assessment with process owners
B) Reviewing past audit findings for the affected system
C) Performing independent control testing
D) Checking whether users are satisfied with system performance
Answer: C) Performing independent control testing
Explanation:
The option involving independent control testing offers the strongest validation of effectiveness because it allows for objective evaluation by parties not responsible for control implementation. Independent testers apply consistent methodologies, review evidence without bias, and compare control performance against established criteria. This ensures credibility and reliability in determining whether the controls are functioning as intended. Furthermore, independent assessment supports compliance requirements and strengthens the organization’s assurance posture by providing verifiable evidence of control performance.
The selection describing a control self-assessment emphasizes internal evaluation by process owners who understand how controls operate within the workflow. While useful for identifying gaps in execution and monitoring day-to-day performance, self-assessments lack objectivity and may overlook weaknesses due to familiarity or assumptions. They are valuable as part of continuous improvement, but not sufficient for validating newly implemented controls at a level needed for assurance.
The choice involving review of past audit findings pertains to understanding historical issues and areas previously identified as needing improvement. While reviewing these findings can provide context, they reflect past conditions rather than the effectiveness of newly implemented controls. Past issues may have changed in relevance or been fully mitigated, so relying on old information is insufficient for validating current control performance.
The option mentioning user satisfaction focuses on system usability and performance from an end-user perspective. Although important for operational efficiency, user satisfaction does not measure security control effectiveness. Users may not be aware of control mechanisms or capable of identifying deeper security vulnerabilities. Therefore, it offers little assurance regarding whether controls function as intended.
The correct answer highlights the need for objective verification through independent control testing. This approach ensures transparency, fulfills compliance expectations, and produces credible results that the organization can rely upon for decision-making regarding residual risk and control optimization.
Question 25:
A risk practitioner notices that multiple business units maintain their own informal risk registers with inconsistent entries. What should be done first?
A) Merge all registers into a single enterprise log immediately
B) Conduct training sessions on proper risk documentation
C) Define and implement a standardized risk taxonomy
D) Discard existing registers and restart the process
Answer: C) Define and implement a standardized risk taxonomy
Explanation:
The choice concerning the establishment of a standardized risk taxonomy is critical because inconsistent terminology, categories, and definitions create confusion and impede accurate reporting. Before attempting to merge data or train staff, the organization must agree on standardized language and criteria for describing risks, impacts, likelihood, and ownership. This taxonomy becomes the foundation for unifying risk management practices across the enterprise and ensures that subsequent data collection, assessment, and reporting are comparable. Without this standardization, any consolidation or training will perpetuate inconsistencies.
The selection about immediately merging all registers into a single enterprise log seems efficient but will likely compound errors and inconsistencies. Combining disparate records without common definitions creates unreliable data with unclear interpretation. This results in misleading reports, flawed prioritization, and difficulty applying risk responses.
The option involving training sessions focuses on improving documentation practices among business units. Training is important, but without a standardized taxonomy, participants would not share a common understanding of risk categories, leading to confusion rather than improvement. Training should follow standardization, not precede it.
The choice recommending discarding existing registers appears drastic and unnecessary. Although the current registers lack consistency, they still may contain valuable insights into risks, controls, and issues within each unit. Eliminating them would cause loss of institutional knowledge and hinder analysis. It is more effective to bring them into alignment gradually using a new taxonomy.
The correct answer emphasizes developing a standardized risk taxonomy because it establishes the necessary framework for consistent documentation, effective training, accurate consolidation, and meaningful analysis. This foundational step enables enterprise-wide risk visibility, enhances decision-making, and supports a structured risk governance process.
Question 26:
Which action should a risk practitioner take first when a newly identified risk exceeds the organization’s defined risk tolerance?
A) Implement additional controls immediately
B) Notify the risk owner and initiate escalation procedures
C) Conduct a lessons-learned review of prior incidents
D) Accept the risk temporarily until mitigation options are evaluated
Answer: B) Notify the risk owner and initiate escalation procedures
Explanation:
The choice indicating notification of the risk owner and initiation of escalation procedures is most appropriate because when a risk exceeds tolerance, it must be brought to the attention of the accountable authority. The risk owner is responsible for making decisions regarding remediation, acceptance, transfer, or escalated approval. This step ensures governance processes function correctly and prevents unilateral actions by the risk practitioner. Escalation enables leadership to determine appropriate response strategies aligned with business priorities and risk appetite.
The option suggesting immediate implementation of additional controls may seem intuitive, but acting without authorization could misalign with strategic direction, improperly allocate resources, or introduce unintended operational impacts. Controls should only be implemented after formal review and approval by the appropriate stakeholders.
The selection describing a lessons-learned review of prior incidents focuses on analyzing past events, which may be helpful later but does not address the immediate need to manage a current risk that exceeds tolerance. Lessons learned provide context but do not substitute for required escalation and decision-making.
The choice advocating temporary acceptance lacks alignment with established governance. A risk that exceeds tolerance cannot be accepted informally or temporarily without authorization. Doing so would violate policy and potentially expose the organization to unacceptable harm.
The correct answer emphasizes proper governance: notifying the designated owner and initiating escalation. This approach ensures that the risk is handled at the appropriate level of authority and that response actions follow established procedures.
Question 27:
A business unit requests to accelerate deployment of a new application, bypassing several planned security assessments. What should the risk practitioner recommend first?
A) Perform a rapid, high-level risk assessment to identify critical exposures
B) Require full completion of all planned assessments
C) Transfer deployment responsibility to the security team
D) Approve deployment with enhanced post-launch monitoring
Answer: A) Perform a rapid, high-level risk assessment to identify critical exposures
Explanation:
The choice that proposes a rapid, high-level risk assessment is most appropriate because it provides timely visibility into the most significant risks while acknowledging the business unit’s need for accelerated deployment. This approach does not eliminate due diligence but enables the practitioner to identify major concerns quickly, determine whether residual risk would violate tolerance, and decide whether expedited processes are acceptable. High-level assessment allows informed decision-making without unnecessary delay and forms the basis for determining whether additional steps are required before deployment.
The option demanding full completion of all planned assessments reflects strong adherence to formal processes but may conflict with urgent business requirements. While comprehensive assessment is the ideal scenario, rigid insistence without understanding priority risks may impede business value. The practitioner should first identify critical exposures before determining whether exceptions are justifiable.
The selection involving transfer of deployment responsibility to the security team is inappropriate because risk practitioners and security teams do not assume operational ownership simply because a business unit requests an expedited timeline. Risk ownership remains with the business, and shifting responsibility does not address the underlying need for risk evaluation.
The option approving deployment with enhanced post-launch monitoring is premature because risks have not yet been assessed. Monitoring is useful after deployment but cannot replace initial evaluation. Deploying without even a high-level understanding of exposures may create unacceptable risk.
The correct answer supports rapid assessment to balance business urgency and risk visibility. It provides actionable insight to guide decision-making while maintaining essential governance.
Question 28:
Which factor is most important when determining key risk indicators (KRIs) for monitoring vendor-related risk?
A) The number of vendors in the procurement portfolio
B) Leading indicators that signal increasing vendor vulnerability
C) Historical audit findings across all vendors
D) The financial performance of the procurement department
Answer: B) Leading indicators that signal increasing vendor vulnerability
Explanation:
The answer focusing on leading indicators is most appropriate because KRIs are designed to provide early warning signals that help organizations act before adverse events occur. For vendor-related risks, leading indicators may include contract noncompliance trends, delays in service delivery, degradation in control assurance, or early financial distress signals. These timely indicators allow proactive risk management and enable the organization to intervene before the vendor relationship becomes unstable or exposes the enterprise to unacceptable risk.
The option referencing the number of vendors in the portfolio is unrelated to determining meaningful KRIs. Portfolio size affects complexity but does not directly correlate with risk exposure. KRIs must be based on measurable indicators of risk conditions, not inventory counts.
The selection involving historical audit findings pertains to lagging indicators because they reflect past issues rather than predicting future risk. While useful for understanding patterns and areas requiring attention, historical data alone cannot serve as effective KRIs without incorporating forward-looking elements.
The option describing financial performance of the procurement department addresses internal budgeting and efficiency, which is not relevant to vendor risk monitoring. Procurement performance metrics do not reflect external vendor conditions or emerging threats.
The correct answer emphasizes leading indicators because they allow the organization to monitor vendor health, anticipate disruptions, and take proactive steps. This aligns with the purpose of KRIs, which is to provide timely insight into risk levels before they materialize into incidents.
Question 29:
A risk practitioner is evaluating a proposed change to a critical system. What should be the primary focus during risk assessment?
A) Identifying all possible technical defects in the new configuration
B) Understanding potential impacts on business processes
C) Ensuring the change aligns with the technology roadmap
D) Determining if the change reduces operational workload
Answer: B) Understanding potential impacts on business processes
Explanation:
The selection concerning understanding impacts on business processes is most important because risk assessments must align with organizational objectives. Critical systems support vital operations, and any change may affect service availability, data integrity, compliance, and business continuity. Focusing primarily on business impact ensures that risk evaluations are meaningful in terms of consequences rather than technical details alone. This approach allows stakeholders to determine whether proposed changes support or hinder business goals.
The option addressing identification of all possible technical defects is overly narrow. While technical analysis matters, identifying every defect is neither feasible nor the primary goal of risk assessment. Technical risks must be considered within the broader business impact framework rather than as isolated issues.
The selection regarding alignment with the technology roadmap focuses on strategic direction but does not address risk impact. A change may align with long-term plans yet still introduce unacceptable risk to current operations.
The option stating reduction of operational workload reflects efficiency considerations but does not capture actual risk exposure. Workload changes may be beneficial but do not determine whether the change is safe or appropriate for a critical system.
The correct answer emphasizes business process impact because risk decisions must be driven by business value, continuity, and acceptable exposure.
Question 30:
Which activity should a risk practitioner perform first when integrating risk management into project management practices?
A) Train project managers on risk terminology
B) Embed risk checkpoints into project lifecycle stages
C) Identify key project stakeholders and their risk expectations
D) Develop project risk reporting templates
Answer: C) Identify key project stakeholders and their risk expectations
Explanation:
The choice that focuses on identifying stakeholders and understanding their expectations is foundational because risk integration must align with the needs, responsibilities, and decision-making authority of those involved in projects. Without clarity regarding who owns risk, who approves mitigation actions, and who defines acceptable levels of exposure, risk processes cannot be effectively embedded into the project lifecycle. Understanding stakeholder expectations ensures that risk management activities are tailored to project culture and objectives.
The option about training project managers is valuable but premature. Training is effective only after the risk practitioner understands the stakeholder landscape and the specific needs of the organization’s project environment. Training must be tailored to these contexts, not applied generically.
The selection describing embedding checkpoints into lifecycle stages is an important step in integrating processes, but it should occur after clarifying roles, expectations, and responsibilities. Without stakeholder alignment, checkpoints may not be adopted or enforced effectively.
The choice involving development of reporting templates addresses documentation but provides little value unless project stakeholders agree on how risks should be recorded and communicated.
The correct answer emphasizes identifying stakeholders because effective integration depends on understanding expectations, governance structure, and decision-making pathways.
Question 31:
During a risk review, several control owners report that controls are functioning as designed, yet incidents continue to occur. What should the risk practitioner evaluate first?
A) Whether controls are addressing the correct risk drivers
B) Whether incident response procedures are outdated
C) Whether employees require additional security awareness training
D) Whether controls comply with audit standards
Answer: A) Whether controls are addressing the correct risk drivers
Explanation:
The option focusing on whether controls address the correct risk drivers is critical because controls may function properly yet fail to mitigate underlying causes of incidents. If controls target symptoms instead of root causes, incidents will persist despite apparent control effectiveness. Evaluating risk drivers helps determine whether controls were designed appropriately, whether new threats have emerged, or whether risk conditions have changed. This ensures risk management efforts remain relevant and effective.
The selection mentioning outdated incident response procedures relates to post-incident handling rather than control effectiveness. While outdated procedures can worsen outcomes, they do not explain why incidents occur in the first place.
The choice referencing additional security awareness training addresses human-related risk factors but may not be relevant if incidents stem from technical or process issues. Training should be pursued only after confirming that risk drivers relate to human error.
The option involving compliance with audit standards focuses on adherence to requirements, not operational effectiveness. Controls may comply with audit standards yet still fail to address real-world threats.
The correct answer emphasizes evaluating risk drivers because this determines whether controls are aligned with actual causes and enables appropriate redesign or enhancement.
Question 32:
A new regulation requires enhanced data retention controls across all business units. What is the risk practitioner’s most important responsibility?
A) Designing detailed technical specifications for retention systems
B) Ensuring data retention risks are reflected in enterprise risk reporting
C) Conducting user training sessions on updated procedures
D) Negotiating with regulators for implementation extensions
Answer: B) Ensuring data retention risks are reflected in enterprise risk reporting
Explanation:
The option that emphasizes incorporating data retention risks into enterprise risk reporting aligns closely with the primary responsibilities of a risk practitioner. Risk practitioners are accountable for ensuring that risks, especially those arising from new regulatory requirements, are properly identified, evaluated, and communicated to senior management and other decision-makers. By reporting risks at an enterprise level, the organization can understand potential compliance implications, financial exposures, operational disruptions, and areas that require prioritization for remediation efforts. This ensures that the organization’s leadership has a comprehensive understanding of emerging regulatory risks and can make informed strategic decisions.
Designing technical specifications for retention systems, while related to the regulation, falls outside the core responsibilities of a risk practitioner. This task is usually managed by IT or system architects who translate regulatory and risk guidance into technical solutions. Risk practitioners may provide oversight and highlight risk concerns, but they are not directly responsible for technical implementation. Their focus is on the identification, assessment, and communication of risks, rather than detailed system design.
Conducting user training on updated procedures is an operational activity typically handled by compliance teams, HR, or departmental managers. While risk practitioners may advise on training needs to ensure awareness of new controls, facilitating training is not their primary responsibility. Effective risk management relies on awareness and adherence, but the practitioner’s main role is to ensure that the underlying risk is recognized and reported.
Negotiating with regulators is also outside the scope of a risk practitioner’s responsibilities. Regulatory negotiations are usually managed by legal or compliance departments in coordination with executive leadership. The risk practitioner’s responsibility is to provide clear reporting on the risk and the potential impact of non-compliance, ensuring that leadership can make informed decisions on how to engage with regulators. Therefore, the correct option focuses on enterprise risk reporting because it ensures governance oversight, visibility, and strategic alignment with regulatory requirements.
Question 33:
Which step should a risk practitioner take first when a risk owner disagrees with the proposed risk rating?
A) Escalate the disagreement to senior management
B) Facilitate a discussion to review assessment criteria
C) Accept the risk owner’s preferred rating
D) Request an audit team review
Answer: B) Facilitate a discussion to review assessment criteria
Explanation:
Facilitating a discussion to review assessment criteria is the most appropriate initial step because disagreements often arise due to differences in interpretation of likelihood, impact, or control effectiveness. A structured discussion allows both the risk practitioner and the risk owner to clarify assumptions, evaluate evidence, and ensure a consistent understanding of how the risk was assessed. This approach maintains transparency in the risk assessment process and fosters a collaborative environment in which all parties can reach alignment without immediately escalating the issue.
Escalating the disagreement to senior management should be considered only if the facilitated discussion does not result in agreement. Premature escalation can undermine the trust between risk practitioners and risk owners and may introduce unnecessary organizational friction. It is a secondary step, not a first response.
Accepting the risk owner’s preferred rating without review compromises the integrity and objectivity of the risk assessment. Risk ratings must reflect evidence-based evaluation and established criteria, rather than personal preferences or opinions. Doing otherwise can lead to inaccurate reporting, inadequate mitigation, and potential regulatory or operational consequences.
Requesting an audit review may provide independent validation, but it is not the first step unless the disagreement persists or is particularly complex. Audit involvement is resource-intensive and should be used to resolve significant unresolved disputes rather than as a standard approach. The correct answer focuses on facilitating discussion first because it promotes alignment, accuracy, and trust in the risk assessment process while ensuring that disagreements are resolved collaboratively and transparently.
Question 34:
A risk practitioner notices inconsistent application of control monitoring activities across departments. What should be done first?
A) Implement automated monitoring tools
B) Develop standardized monitoring procedures
C) Conduct a maturity assessment of each department
D) Replace department-level monitoring with centralized monitoring
Answer: B) Develop standardized monitoring procedures
Explanation:
Developing standardized monitoring procedures is essential to achieve consistency across departments. Without common procedures, monitoring activities will vary by department, leading to inconsistent data collection, reporting, and interpretation of control performance. Standardization ensures that all departments follow minimum requirements, apply controls uniformly, and produce comparable results that can be consolidated at an enterprise level. It also creates clear expectations for departmental teams, improving accountability and governance oversight.
Implementing automated monitoring tools may enhance efficiency but will not resolve inconsistencies on its own. Automation relies on standardized processes to function correctly, and without clear procedures, tools may be misconfigured, misused, or produce misleading results. Tools alone cannot replace structured guidelines and procedural rigor.
Conducting a maturity assessment provides insight into departmental practices and capabilities but does not directly address the inconsistency issue. While maturity assessments are useful for identifying gaps and improvement opportunities, the foundational requirement is the establishment of standard monitoring procedures to ensure uniform application.
Replacing department-level monitoring with centralized monitoring may address some inconsistency but introduces risks such as loss of local accountability and operational context. Centralization may not always be feasible and may still result in inconsistencies if standards are not clearly defined. The correct approach emphasizes standardization as the first step because it establishes a reliable baseline, supports governance, and allows any subsequent automation or centralization to function effectively.
Question 35:
During vendor onboarding, which factor should a risk practitioner evaluate first?
A) The vendor’s alignment with organizational risk appetite
B) The vendor’s contracting history with competitors
C) The vendor’s pricing and discount models
D) The vendor’s marketing reputation
Answer: A) The vendor’s alignment with organizational risk appetite
Explanation:
Evaluating a vendor’s alignment with the organization’s risk appetite is critical because third-party relationships inherently introduce operational, financial, regulatory, and reputational risks. Risk practitioners must ensure that vendors operate within acceptable exposure levels and have adequate controls in place to protect the organization. If a vendor does not align with risk appetite, onboarding them could expose the organization to unacceptable risk, even if other factors, such as cost or reputation, appear favorable.
A vendor’s contracting history with competitors provides limited insight into how they may perform in the context of your organization. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results, and business environments differ across clients, making this factor secondary to risk alignment.
Pricing and discount models relate to financial negotiations rather than risk exposure. While cost considerations are important for procurement, they should never supersede evaluation of risk alignment. Selecting a vendor solely based on favorable pricing could create vulnerabilities if the vendor’s practices fail to meet risk standards.
Marketing reputation may influence brand perception but does not reliably reflect the vendor’s internal controls, security posture, or operational reliability. Reputation alone cannot substitute for formal risk assessment. The correct answer prioritizes alignment with organizational risk appetite because it ensures that vendor engagements are safe, compliant, and consistent with enterprise risk tolerance.
Question 36:
Which action should a risk practitioner prioritize when developing a risk communication plan?
A) Determine communication frequency and escalation triggers
B) Select the reporting software to generate risk dashboards
C) Draft a glossary of risk terms
D) Train staff on communication protocols
Answer: A) Determine communication frequency and escalation triggers
Explanation:
Determining communication frequency and escalation triggers is the most critical step in developing a risk communication plan. Effective communication requires clarity on when updates should be provided and under what circumstances issues should be escalated. This ensures that decision-makers receive relevant information in a timely manner, enabling prompt action to address risks. Frequency and escalation triggers directly influence the structure, cadence, and effectiveness of reporting across the organization.
Selecting reporting software is important but secondary to defining communication requirements. Tools are only effective if the processes and requirements are clearly established. Choosing a system without understanding what information needs to be communicated, how often, and to whom may lead to incomplete or ineffective reporting.
Drafting a glossary of risk terms helps standardize terminology and reduces miscommunication, but it does not define the core framework for communication. While helpful, it is supplementary rather than foundational.
Training staff on communication protocols is necessary but should follow the definition of processes, frequency, and escalation criteria. Without established procedures, training cannot ensure consistent execution. The correct answer prioritizes frequency and escalation triggers because they form the structural backbone of the communication plan, ensuring that risk information reaches the right people at the right time.
Question 37:
A risk practitioner identifies a new cyber threat affecting the industry. What should be done first?
A) Update all security policies immediately
B) Perform an impact and likelihood assessment
C) Notify the board of directors
D) Deploy emergency security patches organization-wide
Answer: B) Perform an impact and likelihood assessment
Explanation:
Performing an impact and likelihood assessment is the critical first step because it enables the organization to understand the relevance and potential severity of the threat. Not all threats affect every organization equally, and an unassessed response may lead to wasted resources or unnecessary disruption. By evaluating impact and likelihood, risk practitioners provide a foundation for prioritizing responses, allocating resources appropriately, and developing targeted mitigation strategies.
Updating security policies immediately is premature. Policies should be revised based on evidence and formal risk assessment. Implementing changes without understanding the risk could introduce confusion, redundancy, or misalignment with actual threat exposure.
Notifying the board is also premature at this stage. Accurate and actionable information should be provided only after an assessment has been completed. Premature notifications could create unnecessary alarm or lead to decisions made on incomplete data.
Deploying emergency patches organization-wide without assessment may be risky. Some systems may be unaffected, and indiscriminate patching could cause operational disruptions or incompatibilities. The correct approach emphasizes assessment first to guide an informed, proportionate, and effective response.
Question 38:
Which element is most important when evaluating the effectiveness of a risk mitigation plan?
A) Degree of risk reduction achieved
B) Cost of mitigation activities
C) Number of stakeholders involved in implementation
D) Speed of implementation
Answer: A) Degree of risk reduction achieved
Explanation:
The degree of risk reduction is the primary indicator of mitigation plan effectiveness because the core purpose of such plans is to reduce risk exposure to acceptable levels. Even if a mitigation initiative is expensive, complex, or slow, it is only effective if it measurably decreases risk. Organizations measure mitigation success primarily by outcomes, not by process metrics or resource usage.
Cost of mitigation is relevant for efficiency and budgeting considerations but does not indicate whether the risk has been sufficiently addressed. A low-cost mitigation that fails to reduce risk may be inefficient in achieving organizational objectives.
The number of stakeholders involved reflects coordination efforts but is not a direct measure of effectiveness. While engagement may influence implementation success, effectiveness depends on tangible risk reduction rather than participation metrics.
Speed of implementation measures responsiveness but is secondary to actual risk reduction. Rapidly implemented controls are valuable only if they meaningfully reduce risk. The correct answer emphasizes risk reduction because it aligns mitigation efforts with organizational objectives and regulatory compliance.
Question 39:
A risk practitioner observes that control owners do not regularly update control performance metrics. What should be done first?
A) Define mandatory reporting timelines
B) Replace control owners with more accountable staff
C) Conduct disciplinary reviews
D) Disable controls until reporting improves
Answer: A) Define mandatory reporting timelines
Explanation:
Defining mandatory reporting timelines is the appropriate first step because control performance monitoring depends on clear expectations and structured procedures. Without defined timelines, reporting will be inconsistent, gaps in oversight will occur, and management will not have reliable data to evaluate control effectiveness. Establishing timelines provides clarity, accountability, and a foundation for consistent monitoring and reporting practices.
Replacing staff is an extreme action that should only be considered if procedural gaps persist despite corrective measures. Premature replacement could create unnecessary disruption and damage morale.
Disciplinary reviews assume negligence or misconduct and may be inappropriate if the issue arises from unclear expectations. Procedural gaps are often the root cause, not personal failings.
Disabling controls is dangerous, as it increases operational risk. Controls should remain active while reporting processes are formalized. The correct first step emphasizes clear expectations through reporting timelines, providing a structured framework for compliance and performance oversight.
Question 40:
Which factor is most important when prioritizing risks for treatment?
A) Alignment with strategic business objectives
B) Availability of mitigation resources
C) The opinion of department managers
D) Time required to implement controls
Answer: A) Alignment with strategic business objectives
Explanation:
Alignment with strategic business objectives is the most critical factor when prioritizing risks for treatment because risks that threaten an organization’s core goals, mission-critical processes, or regulatory obligations have the greatest potential to impact overall organizational success. Risk treatment should focus on protecting value, maintaining operational continuity, and ensuring that the organization can achieve its long-term objectives. By considering strategic alignment first, risk practitioners ensure that resources are directed toward mitigating risks that could disrupt essential business functions or compromise regulatory compliance. This approach helps the organization maintain resilience and supports informed decision-making by senior management, as they can see which risks have the highest potential impact on strategic priorities.
While availability of mitigation resources is a practical consideration, it should not be the primary determinant of risk priority. High-priority risks often require attention even when resources are constrained, and failing to address them due to resource limitations could result in significant operational, financial, or reputational consequences. Resource planning should follow the identification of priority risks, ensuring that appropriate strategies are developed to allocate personnel, budget, and technology effectively. Treating resource availability as secondary to strategic impact ensures that critical risks are not deprioritized simply because mitigation requires careful planning or incremental execution.
The opinions of department managers can provide valuable context and operational insights, but they are inherently subjective and may reflect departmental priorities rather than enterprise-wide objectives. While consultation with department leaders can enhance understanding of risk exposure, relying solely on their input can result in skewed prioritization that overlooks risks with broader organizational implications. Decisions must be made with an enterprise-level perspective, balancing local operational concerns with the overarching goals of the organization. This ensures that risk treatment aligns with strategic objectives rather than individual preferences or departmental pressures.
Time required to implement controls is another operational factor that should inform planning but does not determine the priority of risk treatment. While timely implementation is important for responsiveness, the urgency or duration of control deployment should not outweigh the significance of the risk itself. The primary focus must remain on mitigating risks that have the highest potential to affect organizational objectives, ensuring that risk management efforts deliver maximum strategic value. In summary, prioritizing risks based on alignment with strategic business objectives ensures that the organization addresses the most critical threats first, protecting core operations, supporting regulatory compliance, and reinforcing long-term organizational success.
Popular posts
Recent Posts
- Amazon AWS Certified Security – Specialty SCS-C02 Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 10 Q181-200
- Amazon AWS Certified Security – Specialty SCS-C02 Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 9 Q161-180
- Amazon AWS Certified Security – Specialty SCS-C02 Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 8 Q141-160
- Amazon AWS Certified Security – Specialty SCS-C02 Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 7 Q121-140
- Amazon AWS Certified Security – Specialty SCS-C02 Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 6 Q101-120
