ISACA CRISC – Certification Test
Welcome to the ISACA Risk Management Series preparatory course. This is an extra module where we will give information about the certification test so that you who are in the preparation process can have a better understanding of the proof and the necessary requirements, as well as related costs. I hope you are motivated and determined and that your journey of preparation is a success. I wish you all the best luck and the best accomplishment in every step of the process.
The official description of Isaac for the series Certification means that it is a certification designed to meet the growing demand for professionals who can integrate enterprise risk management with enterprise risk management. Skills in information security controls go against what we have said about alignment with business strategy, but it is important to highlight two aspects here.
First, risk management is a discipline greater than risk management. Second, the series of Certified Professionals must combine this knowledge of risk management with skills in information security controls. That ultimately means information security skills. This means that the IT risk professional must understand information security well in order to better handle their day-to-day activities well. About the requirements for certification, the first thing we observe is that, in fact, it is not a cheap certification, but according to the evidence we have seen, it is a certification that brings financial returns. And this high-cost issue even helps to filter the market a bit, making it less adventurous. Only people really interested in risk management will go to the test. The first requirement is not always stated, but to apply you must be a member of Isaac, which costs 150 per year.
Even to start earning continuing education credits, you must be a member. That’s a cost we will have to bear. It has a return because you participate in the community, have access to the magazine and several free workshops, and it allows you to continue living the experience of a risk professional. So instead of seeing it as an expense, look for the best way to take advantage of that fact positively. Then pass the exam. In the next slide, we will talk more about the event, but I can tell you that it is a difficult but fair examination. I did not think it was done with the handles. There are case studies that allow you to reflect on the situation with the mentality of a risk professional. Following the test, you must submit an application form to the certification where you demonstrate your experience. You need a total of three years of proven experience in at least two lifecycle areas. achieve it within a ten-year period.
Proven here means that you need to get the signature of someone who proves your experience, and they can also ask for additional information or contact the person who signed it. That is, only passing the exam is not necessary. To be certified, you need to think ahead about who your evidence will be. This firm also has a fee that, in these cases, is $50. In addition, the risk professional has to adhere to the code of ethics, which is really a very positive thing and should be taken seriously, as well as agree to submit to the policy of continuing education. It should be emphasized that this policy requires that continuing education credits be issued every year to ensure that the professional is, in fact, keeping up to date. And certification is not just a dead title in his or her book. All of these requirements make certification very valuable and serious and further increase its market value.
Now, speaking about personal proof, it’s a long four or 150 multiple-choice questions, which gives approximately one and a half minutes per question. The proof is manual. At least it was when I did it in December 2017. I don’t know if that was changed. That is on paper and with a pen, which I like a lot because it makes me more focused. Also, it cannot be performed at any time of the year, just in the windows of tests that are posted on the Izaka website, which I placed here. a shortcut to facilitate access to scenario analysis. I should get the best response from the best response. That is, several options will be correct, but for that particular scenario with the variables that are presented, only one alternative will be the best option to fit that scenario.
At this point, my suggestion is that you, during your studies, try to assimilate Isaka’s risk-management mindset during the preparation phase. It is not critical, but rather to comprehend Isaka’s reasoning. So that when you go to the market after the test, you apply this mindset. Yes. You do not need to be attached to Isaac, and you can have personal interpretations within the context in which you work, including local and cultural characteristics. But I repeat during the test that it is best to apply Isaac’s thinking. These cars range from 2000 to 8200 to 800, and 450 is required to pass. But that does not mean much, because you never know how much each issue is worth. The idea is to be ready to hit as many issues as possible—something greater than 85% of the issues. In addition to this training, it is highly recommended that you do some simulations. Isaka itself sells a bank of simple questions.
When I took the test, I bought this Review Questions, Answers, and Explanations menu, which contains 500 questions with a dictated explanation of the answers, both correct and incorrect. This helps a lot to simulate the Isaac and mindset for risk management. Because risk management is very transparent, this training provides the knowledge necessary to understand the discipline. And it may even be that you only go through with it. But I strongly recommend that you do the official simulation. You can keep the textbook at that point, but I think this bank of issues is essential. No question of proof is equal to the questions in this bank of questions, nor are they similar. It’s not about changing values here. The only thing these simulators really provide is the opportunity to assimilate the ISAACA mindset and know how to think through the resolution of the scenarios that will be presented in the test.