Isaca CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 3 Q41-60

Visit here for our full Isaca CRISC exam dumps and practice test questions.

Question 41:

Which step should a risk practitioner take first when conducting a post-incident review?

A) Document lessons learned and update procedures
B) Determine the root cause of the incident
C) Notify senior management about the incident
D) Implement corrective controls immediately

Answer: B) Determine the root cause of the incident

Explanation: 

The choice involving determining the root cause is essential because understanding why the incident occurred provides the foundation for meaningful corrective actions. Without identifying the underlying cause, any measures implemented may be superficial or misdirected, leaving the organization vulnerable to recurrence. Root cause analysis evaluates processes, control gaps, and systemic factors, ensuring that remediation addresses actual weaknesses rather than symptoms.

The option describing documentation of lessons learned and updating procedures is critical for organizational learning but is premature if the root cause is unknown. Lessons learned rely on accurate understanding of contributing factors; documenting before cause identification risks embedding incorrect conclusions.

The choice regarding notifying senior management is important for governance and accountability but does not solve the problem. Leadership should be informed after initial analysis to enable informed decision-making regarding strategic, operational, and financial responses.

The selection about implementing corrective controls immediately may be tempting but is risky without understanding the cause. Premature corrective actions can be inefficient, misaligned, or insufficient, and may inadvertently disrupt operations.

The correct answer emphasizes root cause determination because it informs all subsequent steps in post-incident review, including corrective action, reporting, and continuous improvement. This ensures that lessons learned and procedural updates are accurate and effective.

Question 42:

Which risk response is most appropriate when a high-impact risk cannot be fully mitigated due to technological limitations?

A) Accept the residual risk and monitor closely
B) Ignore the risk until technology improves
C) Transfer the risk to another department
D) Document the risk and terminate the process

Answer:  A) Accept the residual risk and monitor closely

Explanation: 

The choice focusing on acceptance and close monitoring is suitable when technological constraints prevent full mitigation. Acceptance does not mean neglect; it implies recognition of residual exposure and proactive oversight. Monitoring ensures early detection of changes in risk conditions and allows timely response if the situation worsens.

The option of ignoring the risk is inappropriate. Leaving a known high-impact risk unmanaged could lead to severe operational, financial, or reputational consequences. Ignoring the risk undermines governance and violates risk management principles.

The selection transferring the risk to another department may not be feasible because the originating business unit retains ultimate accountability. Transferring operational responsibility does not eliminate exposure and may create confusion or misalignment with accountability structures.

The choice of documenting the risk and terminating the process is often impractical. Termination may be costly or operationally disruptive, particularly for critical business activities. Termination should be considered only after all feasible mitigation options have been explored.

The correct answer emphasizes acceptance with monitoring because it balances realistic constraints with proactive oversight. This approach ensures that the organization remains aware of residual exposure while allocating resources effectively to manage critical threats.

Question 43:

When assessing third-party risk, which activity should be prioritized first?

A) Evaluating the vendor’s financial stability
B) Reviewing historical incident reports
C) Identifying regulatory and contractual obligations
D) Conducting on-site inspections

Answer: C) Identifying regulatory and contractual obligations

Explanation: 

The choice emphasizing regulatory and contractual obligations is crucial because these define the legal and operational boundaries for engaging the vendor. Identifying requirements upfront ensures that any engagement complies with laws, industry standards, and contractual expectations. Early understanding of obligations guides risk assessment, control selection, and monitoring plans.

The option evaluating financial stability is important but secondary. Financial assessments provide insight into a vendor’s long-term viability, but without first ensuring compliance with obligations, the engagement may be illegal or expose the organization to immediate liability.

The selection reviewing historical incident reports provides valuable context regarding past performance. However, historical incidents alone cannot determine whether a vendor is suitable under current regulatory and contractual conditions.

The choice conducting on-site inspections may reveal operational risks but is often resource-intensive. Inspections are most effective after understanding obligations and identifying potential compliance gaps.

The correct answer prioritizes regulatory and contractual review because legal and contractual alignment is a prerequisite for assessing operational suitability, ensuring compliance, and managing risk effectively.

Question 44:

Which activity best ensures that risk data collected across departments is consistent and comparable?

A) Conducting ad-hoc risk workshops
B) Implementing a standardized risk framework
C) Assigning a dedicated risk liaison to each department
D) Relying on department-specific risk scoring

Answer: B) Implementing a standardized risk framework

Explanation: 

The choice involving a standardized risk framework is essential because it provides consistent definitions, scoring methodologies, and reporting structures across all departments. By implementing a common framework, the organization ensures that each department assesses and reports risks using the same criteria and scales. This consistency is critical for accurately aggregating and comparing risks at the enterprise level, enabling leadership to prioritize effectively and make informed decisions. Without a standardized approach, risk data may differ significantly across departments, creating gaps, misinterpretations, and potential blind spots in enterprise risk management. A standardized framework also facilitates regulatory compliance and internal audits by providing a clear, repeatable process for assessing and reporting risks.

The option of conducting ad-hoc workshops can support awareness and foster discussion among staff, but it does not establish consistency in risk assessment or reporting. Workshops are useful for qualitative understanding and knowledge sharing, but they cannot enforce uniform definitions, scoring criteria, or reporting formats. While they may improve risk awareness, they are insufficient as a mechanism to ensure that all departments are aligned in how they identify, evaluate, and communicate risks. Inconsistencies in interpretation would persist without a formal framework guiding the process.

Assigning dedicated risk liaisons to each department can enhance communication, provide guidance, and support local risk management efforts. However, this measure alone cannot ensure consistency if a standardized framework is not in place. Liaisons may apply their own interpretations or judgments when evaluating risks, which could result in variations between departments. While beneficial as a support mechanism, dedicated liaisons are complementary rather than foundational; their effectiveness depends on the existence of clearly defined, organization-wide standards and methodologies.

Relying on department-specific risk scoring approaches introduces variability and inconsistencies that undermine enterprise-wide risk aggregation. When each department uses its own definitions, metrics, and scoring practices, comparing risks across units becomes unreliable, and decision-makers may receive misleading information. This approach increases the likelihood of gaps, duplication, or misalignment with strategic objectives. The correct solution, therefore, is a standardized risk framework because it ensures comparability, facilitates aggregation, and supports consistent, informed enterprise risk decisions. It provides the foundation for accurate reporting, prioritization, and oversight, strengthening the organization’s overall risk management capability.

Question 45:

Which factor is most important when prioritizing mitigation for operational risks?

A) Likelihood and potential impact on critical processes
B) Ease of implementing controls
C) Cost of mitigation activities
D) Departmental preferences

Answer:  A) Likelihood and potential impact on critical processes

Explanation:

The choice emphasizing likelihood and impact is fundamental because effective risk prioritization relies on understanding both the probability of a risk occurring and the severity of its potential consequences. Risks with a high likelihood of occurrence and significant impact on critical business processes demand immediate attention, as they pose the greatest threat to operational continuity, regulatory compliance, and strategic objectives. By evaluating both factors, organizations can focus resources on mitigating risks that, if realized, would have the most substantial negative effect on enterprise value. This structured approach ensures that risk treatment efforts are aligned with the organization’s overall objectives and that decision-makers are addressing the most pressing threats first.

The option concerning ease of implementation may inform practical considerations but does not determine strategic priority. While simpler or faster mitigations may be easier to execute, prioritizing risks solely on convenience can result in critical risks being neglected. A low-effort mitigation may reduce minor risks quickly but leaves significant vulnerabilities unaddressed, potentially leading to disruptions or financial loss. Therefore, ease of implementation should be considered in the planning phase after high-priority risks have been identified, rather than as the primary criterion for prioritization.

The selection regarding cost of mitigation reflects financial feasibility, but cost alone cannot justify deprioritizing or ignoring critical risks. Expensive mitigations may still be necessary if the risk they address has a high potential impact on the organization. Conversely, low-cost measures may not adequately mitigate significant risks. Effective risk prioritization balances cost considerations with the potential harm a risk could cause, ensuring that resources are allocated to address the most consequential threats, even if mitigation requires significant investment.

The choice reflecting departmental preferences introduces subjectivity that can misalign risk treatment with enterprise priorities. Individual departments may perceive certain risks as more pressing based on local operational concerns, but these perspectives do not necessarily correspond with the organization’s strategic objectives. Decisions must be guided by an objective assessment of likelihood and impact rather than personal opinions or departmental biases. By focusing on likelihood and impact, risk practitioners ensure that mitigation efforts address the most critical threats, protect business continuity, and support the organization’s long-term strategic goals. This method provides a consistent, evidence-based approach to prioritization that strengthens governance and risk management effectiveness.

Question 46:

Which approach best supports proactive identification of emerging risks?

A) Conducting annual risk assessments
B) Monitoring industry trends and external threat intelligence
C) Performing internal audit reviews
D) Reviewing past incident reports

Answer: B) Monitoring industry trends and external threat intelligence

Explanation: 

Conducting annual risk assessments provides a structured review of organizational risks at a fixed point in time. While this helps establish a baseline understanding of the risk landscape, it is inherently retrospective and periodic. This means that rapidly evolving risks or new threats emerging between assessment cycles may not be captured, limiting the organization’s ability to respond proactively. Annual assessments are necessary for overall risk governance, but they lack the real-time responsiveness needed for emerging risks.

Performing internal audit reviews evaluates the effectiveness and compliance of existing controls, processes, and procedures. Internal audits are generally designed to ensure adherence to established policies and to identify gaps in controls or process execution. While useful for validating internal operations, audits are backward-looking by nature and focus primarily on operational or compliance risk rather than detecting new external threats.

Reviewing past incident reports provides lessons learned from events that have already occurred. This option helps in understanding recurring problems, root causes, and the effectiveness of prior responses. However, incident reports are inherently reactive. They do not provide forward-looking insight into potential threats or anticipate changes in the external environment that may create new risk exposures.

Monitoring industry trends and external threat intelligence allows organizations to stay informed about changes in regulations, technological advancements, competitive actions, and emerging threats in the market. This proactive approach enables early detection of risks that could impact the organization, giving management the opportunity to develop mitigation strategies before issues arise. By continuously analyzing external intelligence, organizations can adapt quickly to shifts in the risk landscape, ensuring resilience and informed decision-making. Therefore, monitoring trends and external threat intelligence is the most effective method for proactively identifying emerging risks.

Question 47:

Which activity is most important when validating the effectiveness of a newly implemented control?

A) Review control design documentation
B) Conduct independent testing and evidence evaluation
C) Obtain verbal confirmation from control owners
D) Verify user satisfaction with processes

Answer: B) Conduct independent testing and evidence evaluation

Explanation: 

Reviewing control design documentation provides insight into how the control is intended to function. It is a necessary step to understand the planned procedures, responsibilities, and objectives of the control. However, design documentation alone cannot confirm whether the control operates effectively in practice, and it does not provide evidence that the control achieves its intended outcome.

Obtaining verbal confirmation from control owners relies on subjective reporting. While owners may have firsthand knowledge of control processes, they may unintentionally overestimate effectiveness or fail to recognize weaknesses. This approach lacks objectivity and cannot reliably demonstrate that the control is functioning as required.

Verifying user satisfaction assesses the operational experience of end users interacting with the process or system. While positive user experience may indicate smooth operations, it does not equate to control effectiveness. Users may not be aware of compliance gaps, security issues, or process deficiencies that could compromise risk management objectives.

Conducting independent testing and evidence evaluation ensures an objective assessment of the control’s operational effectiveness. This approach involves verifying that the control performs as intended, collecting tangible evidence, and identifying any deviations or weaknesses. Independent testing mitigates bias and provides management with credible assurance that the control fulfills its purpose. By relying on evidence rather than perception or documentation alone, this method offers the most reliable validation of newly implemented controls.

Question 48:

Which factor is most important when determining residual risk after implementing controls?

A) Risk appetite and tolerance levels
B) Number of controls deployed
C) Cost of implementing controls
D) Ease of monitoring controls

Answer:  A) Risk appetite and tolerance levels

Explanation: 

The number of controls deployed measures quantity but does not indicate effectiveness. An organization can implement numerous controls without reducing risk to an acceptable level. Simply counting controls does not address whether they adequately mitigate the threats they are intended to address or whether residual risk remains within acceptable limits.

The cost of implementing controls reflects budgetary considerations but does not define whether residual risk is acceptable. A control could be inexpensive yet ineffective, or costly but insufficient to reduce risk to a tolerable level. Cost considerations support decision-making but are secondary to evaluating whether the risk exposure aligns with organizational tolerance.

Ease of monitoring controls refers to operational convenience rather than risk mitigation. While manageable and efficient monitoring is beneficial, it does not guarantee that risks are sufficiently addressed or that residual risk falls within acceptable boundaries. Easy-to-monitor controls may still leave significant vulnerabilities unaddressed.

Risk appetite and tolerance levels define the amount of risk the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Evaluating residual risk against these thresholds is crucial to determine whether additional controls or mitigation measures are required. Even with robust controls, residual risks that exceed tolerance levels demand action. By focusing on risk appetite, organizations ensure that control measures align with strategic priorities and governance expectations, making this factor the most critical when assessing residual risk.

Question 49:

Which step should be performed first when integrating risk management into organizational decision-making?

A) Identify decision-makers and their risk responsibilities
B) Develop risk reporting dashboards
C) Conduct enterprise-wide risk workshops
D) Draft risk management policies

Answer:  A) Identify decision-makers and their risk responsibilities

Explanation: 

Developing risk reporting dashboards provides visualization of risk metrics and supports decision-making. However, dashboards are only useful if the organization has clearly identified decision-makers and understands their information needs. Without clarity on roles and responsibilities, the dashboards may present irrelevant or untargeted data, limiting their effectiveness in supporting informed decisions.

Conducting enterprise-wide risk workshops enhances awareness, collaboration, and communication around risk. These sessions encourage discussion of risk scenarios and controls but are most impactful when participants understand their specific roles in decision-making. Workshops alone do not integrate risk into decisions unless accountability and responsibilities are established.

Drafting risk management policies is an essential step for governance and standardization. Policies provide formal guidance and frameworks for risk management activities. However, policies should reflect organizational roles, responsibilities, and decision structures. Without first identifying decision-makers, policies may not align with the practical operational or strategic realities of the organization.

Identifying decision-makers and clarifying their risk responsibilities establishes the foundation for effective integration of risk management into decision-making. Knowing who owns, reviews, and approves risks ensures that information flows appropriately, escalation paths are clear, and risk considerations are embedded into operational and strategic decisions. By defining accountability first, subsequent steps such as reporting, workshops, and policy development become more effective and targeted, making this the critical initial action for risk integration.

Question 50:

Which action is most effective in promoting risk-aware culture in an organization?

A) Providing targeted training and awareness programs
B) Publishing risk management policies
C) Conducting annual risk assessments
D) Issuing quarterly risk reports

Answer: A) Providing targeted training and awareness programs

Explanation:

Publishing risk management policies establishes formal rules and expectations. Policies guide behavior and provide a reference framework but are unlikely to change culture by themselves. Employees may understand what is required without internalizing the importance or relevance of risk management in their daily activities.

Conducting annual risk assessments helps identify risks and evaluate controls, but these activities focus on analysis rather than influencing attitudes or behavior. While they are critical for risk governance, they do not inherently promote engagement or awareness among employees across the organization.

Issuing quarterly risk reports provides visibility to management about risk trends, control effectiveness, and key exposures. While valuable for leadership oversight, reports are often not directly actionable by operational staff and may not engage employees at all levels, limiting their influence on organizational culture.

Providing targeted training and awareness programs directly addresses knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors regarding risk. Well-designed programs educate employees about recognizing and responding to risks, understanding controls, and appreciating the impact of risk management on achieving objectives. Awareness initiatives reinforce proactive behaviors, encourage reporting, and cultivate a shared understanding of risk responsibilities. By embedding risk concepts into daily work through training and awareness, organizations effectively promote a risk-aware culture that aligns with strategy and strengthens overall resilience.

Question 51:

Which activity is most important for maintaining an up-to-date enterprise risk register?

A) Periodically reviewing and validating entries with process owners
B) Archiving historical risks annually
C) Updating entries based on audit recommendations only
D) Maintaining a fixed template without change

Answer:  A) Periodically reviewing and validating entries with process owners

Explanation:

Option A, periodically reviewing and validating entries with process owners, is critical because the risk landscape is dynamic. Process owners have direct knowledge of day-to-day operations and are aware of emerging risks, changes in processes, or shifts in control effectiveness. Engaging with them regularly ensures that the risk register accurately represents current enterprise risks and is not just a historical document. This approach helps to detect new risks promptly and maintain a living document that management can rely on for decision-making.

Option B, archiving historical risks annually, is important for maintaining records and compliance purposes. However, archiving does not address the currency or relevance of active risks. While it is useful for trend analysis and organizational memory, it does not ensure that ongoing risks are monitored or mitigated effectively. Therefore, reliance on archiving alone would not maintain the risk register’s operational usefulness.

Option C, updating entries based solely on audit recommendations, limits the register to risks already identified through audits. While audits provide valuable insight, they occur periodically and focus primarily on compliance or control effectiveness rather than the full operational risk landscape. Emerging risks or operational changes could be missed if updates are tied exclusively to audit findings, leaving the organization potentially exposed.

Option D, maintaining a fixed template without change, reduces flexibility and adaptability. A static approach cannot accommodate the evolution of the business environment, process updates, or emerging threats. New categories of risk may arise that the template does not support, resulting in gaps in coverage.

The correct answer, A, is the most effective because periodic review with process owners ensures that the enterprise risk register is continuously updated, accurate, and aligned with actual business operations. This collaborative and proactive approach allows organizations to make informed risk management decisions, maintain regulatory compliance, and support strategic planning with a clear understanding of current threats and vulnerabilities.

Question 52:

Which factor is most important when determining ownership of a newly identified risk?

A) The business unit accountable for the risk outcome
B) The department with technical expertise
C) The team with budget authority
D) The individual reporting to senior management

Answer: A) The business unit accountable for the risk outcome

Explanation:

Option A, the business unit accountable for the risk outcome, is critical because effective risk ownership requires both responsibility and authority. The accountable unit has the ability to influence decisions, implement controls, and monitor outcomes. Assigning ownership to this unit ensures that the risk is actively managed by the entity directly impacted by it and that mitigation actions are aligned with operational and strategic objectives.

Option B, the department with technical expertise, can provide guidance and insight into risk management measures. However, expertise alone does not confer decision-making authority or ultimate responsibility. Technical knowledge supports risk mitigation but cannot replace accountability for outcomes, which is essential for effective risk ownership.

Option C, the team with budget authority, may have control over financial resources, enabling funding for risk mitigation. Nevertheless, budget control without operational responsibility does not guarantee active management of the risk or that decisions reflect the actual impact on business processes.

Option D, the individual reporting to senior management, may be influential in communication and escalation. However, without ownership of the processes affected by the risk, this individual cannot implement corrective actions directly or ensure accountability for outcomes.

The correct answer, A, emphasizes that assigning ownership to the business unit responsible for the risk outcome ensures clarity, accountability, and effectiveness. This approach aligns authority, responsibility, and operational control, supporting timely mitigation and informed decision-making, while reinforcing organizational governance and risk culture.

Question 53:

Which action should a risk practitioner take first when a significant regulatory change is announced?

A) Assess potential impacts on business operations
B) Immediately update policies and procedures
C) Notify the board of directors
D) Train staff on compliance requirements

Answer:  A) Assess potential impacts on business operations

Explanation:

Option A, assessing potential impacts on business operations, is essential because it provides the foundation for all subsequent actions. Understanding how a regulatory change affects processes, controls, and operational workflows allows the organization to prioritize necessary adjustments. Without this step, policy updates, staff training, and notifications may be misaligned or ineffective, potentially exposing the organization to compliance risks.

Option B, immediately updating policies and procedures, is premature. Policy updates should be informed by an impact assessment to ensure they address actual operational and regulatory implications. Implementing changes without understanding the broader effect may result in ineffective or unnecessary measures that do not mitigate real risks.

Option C, notifying the board of directors, is an important governance activity but should occur after an initial impact assessment. Communicating preliminary information without analysis may lead to confusion or overestimation of potential exposure, undermining informed decision-making at the executive level.

Option D, training staff on compliance requirements, is necessary but must follow the assessment to ensure that the training is targeted and relevant. Providing generic guidance before understanding operational impacts risks ineffective compliance behavior and unnecessary workload.

The correct answer, A, emphasizes assessing operational impacts first. This structured approach ensures that policy updates, board communication, and staff training are aligned with actual requirements, supporting regulatory compliance, operational continuity, and effective risk management in response to regulatory changes.

Question 54:

Which step should a risk practitioner perform first when a high-priority risk event occurs?

A) Activate the incident response plan
B) Conduct a post-incident review
C) Document the event in the risk register
D) Notify senior management after resolution

Answer: A) Activate the incident response plan

Explanation:

Option A, activating the incident response plan, is the immediate priority because it addresses the ongoing risk in real time. Incident response is designed to contain and mitigate the impact of the event, protect critical assets, and ensure operational continuity. Rapid activation of the plan is essential to reduce potential harm and prevent escalation of the incident.

Option B, conducting a post-incident review, is critical for learning and continuous improvement. However, it must occur after the incident is managed and immediate threats are contained. Performing a review before controlling the risk would be ineffective and potentially harmful.

Option C, documenting the event in the risk register, is necessary for accountability and future reference. Nevertheless, recording the event does not directly mitigate the ongoing impact. Documentation should follow or occur in parallel with active response measures, not as the first step.

Option D, notifying senior management after resolution, is part of governance and reporting. While this step ensures oversight, waiting until after resolution does not address the immediate operational risk or protect the organization during the event.

The correct answer, A, emphasizes that immediate action through the incident response plan is paramount. This ensures that the organization effectively manages high-priority risks, mitigates potential damage, and lays the groundwork for subsequent reviews, documentation, and reporting. Prioritizing response over other activities is essential for operational resilience.

Question 55:

Which method best supports continuous monitoring of enterprise risk?

A) Implementing automated key risk indicators (KRIs)
B) Conducting quarterly workshops
C) Reviewing annual audit reports
D) Updating risk registers annually

Answer: A) Implementing automated key risk indicators (KRIs)

Explanation:

Option A, implementing automated key risk indicators (KRIs), provides real-time visibility into risk exposure. KRIs track thresholds and trends continuously, allowing for immediate detection of deviations from acceptable limits. Automation ensures that the monitoring process is systematic, timely, and proactive, enabling management to take action before risks escalate.

Option B, conducting quarterly workshops, supports awareness and collaboration but occurs periodically rather than continuously. While workshops help identify and discuss risks, they do not provide ongoing visibility or enable rapid response to emerging threats.

Option C, reviewing annual audit reports, is a backward-looking method that informs management about past risks and control effectiveness. It is insufficient for continuous monitoring because it cannot capture real-time developments or immediate deviations in the risk environment.

Option D, updating risk registers annually, provides a snapshot of risks at a specific point in time. This frequency is too infrequent to support proactive or continuous risk management, leaving the organization vulnerable to emerging risks between updates.

The correct answer, A, emphasizes automated KRIs because they provide timely, actionable information that supports continuous monitoring. This approach enables proactive risk management, early warning of potential issues, and alignment with strategic objectives. KRIs integrate seamlessly into risk governance frameworks and strengthen organizational resilience.

Related Exams:

Isaca CISA Certified Information Systems Auditor Exam Dumps & Practice Tests Questions

Isaca CISM Certified Information Security Manager Exam Dumps & Practice Tests Questions

Isaca COBIT 2019 COBIT 2019 Foundation Exam Dumps & Practice Tests Questions

Isaca COBIT 2019 Design and Implementation COBIT 2019 Design and Implementation Exam Dumps & Practice Tests Questions

Isaca COBIT 5 A Business Framework for the Governance and Management of Enterprise IT Exam Dumps & Practice Tests Questions

Isaca CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control Exam Dumps & Practice Tests Questions

Isaca IT Risk Fundamentals IT Risk Fundamentals Exam Dumps & Practice Tests Questions

Question 56:

Which factor is most critical when performing risk assessments on legacy systems?

A) System dependency and integration with other critical processes
B) Age of hardware and software
C) Vendor support contract length
D) User satisfaction with the system

Answer:  A) System dependency and integration with other critical processes

Explanation: 

The option highlighting system dependency and integration is central because legacy systems often support multiple interdependent business processes. When assessing risk, understanding how a legacy system interacts with other critical functions is crucial, as a failure in one system can trigger cascading effects across the organization. This interconnectivity means that a single vulnerability may have far-reaching operational consequences, affecting not just technical performance but also service delivery, compliance, and business continuity.

The choice of age of hardware and software can provide insight into potential maintenance issues or the likelihood of technical failures. Older systems may be more prone to breakdowns or performance degradation, but age alone does not capture the broader operational or organizational risk. Legacy systems can still be stable and critical, and focusing solely on age could lead to underestimating the true risk posed by their integration with other systems.

Vendor support contract length is an important consideration for maintenance, patching, and technical support. While having a contract in place may reduce downtime or provide assistance in case of failure, it does not necessarily reflect the potential business impact of a system outage or failure. A system might be fully supported by a vendor, but if it is deeply integrated into key processes, any disruption could have severe organizational implications, making integration a more critical factor.

User satisfaction with the system focuses on usability and the day-to-day experience of staff interacting with the system. While this is important for operational efficiency and employee productivity, it does not directly indicate risk severity or impact on business processes. A system can be unpopular yet still critical to core operations, meaning that prioritizing user satisfaction alone could misguide risk mitigation efforts.

System dependency and integration is the correct choice because it directly addresses the potential for systemic impact. By evaluating how a legacy system is intertwined with essential processes, risk practitioners can identify vulnerabilities that may have significant organizational consequences. This approach ensures that mitigation strategies are prioritized according to the potential business impact rather than peripheral factors like hardware age, vendor contracts, or user satisfaction. It provides a holistic view of operational risk and guides effective allocation of resources for maintaining system reliability and continuity.

Question 57:

Which activity should a risk practitioner perform first when evaluating risk in a newly established project?

A) Identify key project stakeholders
B) Develop risk reporting templates
C) Conduct detailed control testing
D) Train project staff on risk procedures

Answer: A) Identify key project stakeholders

Explanation:

Identifying key project stakeholders is fundamental because stakeholders define the scope, objectives, and decision-making authority within a project. Understanding who holds influence and responsibility is essential to ensure that risk management activities align with organizational priorities and governance structures. Stakeholders also provide critical insights into the potential risks and operational challenges specific to the project, making their identification a foundational step before performing other risk management activities.

Developing risk reporting templates is an important activity for documenting and communicating risks. However, without understanding who the stakeholders are and what their information needs entail, templates may not accurately capture or prioritize the most relevant risks. Templates are tools that support reporting and tracking, but their effectiveness depends on having a clear understanding of the organizational roles and risk expectations defined by stakeholders.

Conducting detailed control testing is premature in the initial phase because control effectiveness can only be evaluated meaningfully when critical risks are identified. Without first engaging stakeholders to determine what risks matter most, testing may be misaligned with the project’s objectives or organizational priorities. Control testing is a technical activity that relies on context provided by stakeholder input.

Training project staff on risk procedures is also secondary. While training is vital to ensure staff understand risk protocols and compliance expectations, it should follow stakeholder identification to ensure training content is relevant to each role’s responsibilities. Without identifying stakeholders first, there is a risk that training could omit critical responsibilities or misalign with governance requirements.

The correct choice is identifying key project stakeholders because it establishes the governance foundation for all subsequent risk management activities. It ensures that risk identification, assessment, mitigation, reporting, and training are aligned with the project’s objectives and stakeholder expectations. This step is critical to embedding risk management into the project lifecycle effectively, setting the stage for meaningful risk evaluation and mitigation.

Question 58:

Which factor is most important when assessing technology-related operational risk?

A) Likelihood and impact on critical business operations
B) Cost of technology implementation
C) Vendor reputation
D) User convenience

Answer: A) Likelihood and impact on critical business operations

Explanation:

The option focusing on likelihood and impact on critical business operations is central to operational risk assessment. Risk prioritization is most effective when it considers both the probability of an event occurring and its potential consequences. This ensures that the organization allocates resources to mitigate the risks that pose the greatest threat to business continuity, regulatory compliance, and operational efficiency. By combining likelihood with impact, risk practitioners can develop a clear hierarchy of priorities, focusing attention on areas where operational disruption would be most damaging.

Cost of technology implementation is an important factor in budgeting and feasibility considerations, but it does not directly measure the operational risk itself. High-cost solutions may be warranted if they address high-impact risks, whereas low-cost measures may be insufficient for critical exposures. Financial considerations support decision-making but cannot replace a risk-focused assessment of likelihood and impact.

Related Exams:

Isaca AI Fundamentals Artificial Intelligence Fundamentals Exam Dumps & Practice Tests Questions

Isaca CCAK Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge Exam Dumps & Practice Tests Questions

Isaca CCOA Certified Cybersecurity Operations Analyst Exam Dumps & Practice Tests Questions

Isaca CDPSE Certified Data Privacy Solutions Engineer Exam Dumps & Practice Tests Questions

Isaca CGEIT Certified in the Governance of Enterprise IT Exam Dumps & Practice Tests Questions

Vendor reputation contributes to the assessment by indicating reliability, responsiveness, and quality of service. While reputation can inform vendor selection and contract management, it does not quantify the potential operational disruption a system may cause. An otherwise reputable vendor may support a system that, if it fails, could halt key processes or compromise compliance, which highlights the need to prioritize risk based on operational significance rather than reputation alone.

User convenience is focused on the ease of use and staff satisfaction with a technology solution. While this can influence adoption and efficiency, it does not reflect the severity or probability of risk to business operations. A convenient system that is critical to operations may still introduce significant risk if it lacks redundancy, security, or reliability measures.

The correct answer is likelihood and impact because these factors directly determine the potential operational consequences of technology failures. Prioritizing assessments based on this combination ensures that mitigation efforts address the most consequential risks. This approach helps organizations protect critical functions, allocate resources efficiently, and maintain continuity in the face of technological disruptions.

Question 59:

Which activity should a risk practitioner perform first when integrating cybersecurity risk into enterprise risk management?

A) Identify critical assets and systems
B) Conduct penetration testing
C) Implement security awareness programs
D) Review historical incident reports

Answer: A) Identify critical assets and systems

Explanation:

Identifying critical assets and systems is the first step because it defines what is valuable and essential to the organization’s operations. Cybersecurity risk cannot be effectively assessed or mitigated without knowing which systems support critical business processes, contain sensitive data, or are essential to regulatory compliance. By establishing this baseline, risk practitioners can prioritize their efforts on areas where cybersecurity incidents would have the greatest operational and financial impact.

Conducting penetration testing is an important technical activity to uncover vulnerabilities, but it is only meaningful when focused on critical assets. Performing tests indiscriminately across all systems could waste resources and fail to highlight the most consequential risks. Penetration testing is therefore a secondary step that relies on the initial identification of assets to be effective.

Implementing security awareness programs is also important for reducing human-related risk and fostering a security-conscious culture. However, awareness initiatives must be tailored to protect the systems and assets identified as critical. Without this focus, training may be generic, diluted, and less effective in preventing incidents that could materially affect the organization.

Reviewing historical incident reports provides context and helps identify recurring threats or weaknesses, but its effectiveness depends on aligning insights with the organization’s critical systems. Historical data alone cannot guide prioritization if practitioners have not first determined which assets are most vital to operations and resilience.

The correct answer is identifying critical assets and systems because it establishes the foundation for all other cybersecurity risk activities. It ensures that testing, training, and historical analysis are targeted at the systems whose compromise would most significantly impact business objectives. This approach integrates cybersecurity effectively into enterprise risk management and allows the organization to focus resources on protecting what matters most.

Question 60:

Which approach best ensures that risk responses remain effective over time?

A) Continuous monitoring and periodic review of controls
B) Initial implementation and one-time validation
C) Annual audit without ongoing monitoring
D) Ad-hoc assessments only when incidents occur

Answer: A) Continuous monitoring and periodic review of controls

Explanation:

Continuous monitoring and periodic review of controls ensures that risk responses remain effective over time by providing ongoing visibility into system performance, control adherence, and emerging threats. Monitoring allows organizations to detect deviations or failures early, facilitating timely corrective actions. Periodic reviews complement monitoring by evaluating whether controls remain aligned with business objectives, regulatory requirements, and evolving risk landscapes, ensuring sustained effectiveness and relevance.

Initial implementation and one-time validation focus on verifying that controls function correctly at a single point in time. While this step is necessary, it is insufficient for maintaining long-term control effectiveness. Risks evolve as processes, technologies, and external factors change, so a one-time assessment cannot account for new threats or degradation of existing controls over time.

Annual audits provide periodic assurance but may fail to identify risks that arise between audit cycles. Depending solely on annual reviews leaves organizations vulnerable to rapidly changing environments, as critical control deficiencies or emerging threats may go unnoticed for months. This approach is inherently reactive and less responsive than continuous monitoring.

Ad-hoc assessments triggered only by incidents are reactive and insufficient for proactive risk management. Waiting for an event to occur before assessing controls can result in preventable losses, operational disruption, or compliance breaches. This approach lacks the systematic oversight necessary to maintain consistent control effectiveness.

Continuous monitoring and periodic review is the correct choice because it combines proactive surveillance with structured evaluation, ensuring that risk responses adapt to changing circumstances. This approach promotes organizational resilience by detecting emerging threats, maintaining alignment with objectives, and enabling timely updates to controls, which collectively sustain the effectiveness of risk management over time.