Isaca Updated CRISC Exam Questions and Answers by elle

The most important action for the risk practitioner to take when a risk assessment has identified increased losses associated with an IT risk scenario is to update the risk rating. A risk rating is a measure of the overall level of risk, based on the combination of the probability and impact of the risk scenario. A risk rating helps to prioritize the risks, communicate the risk exposure, and monitor the risk response. Updating the risk rating is the most important action, because it reflects the current state and magnitude of the risk, and it triggers the review and revision of the risk response plan, if needed. Updating the risk rating also ensures that the risk register and the risk profile are accurate and complete, and that the risk management process is consistent and effective. The other options are not the most important action, although they may be related or subsequent steps in the risk management process. Reevaluating inherent risk is a part of the risk analysis process, which estimates the probability and impact of the risk scenario before considering the existing controls. Reevaluating inherent risk can help to identify the root causes and drivers of the risk, and to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls, but it does not change the overall level of risk or the risk response plan. Developing new risk scenarios is a part of the risk identification process, which identifies and describes the potential events or situations that could affect the achievement of the objectives. Developing new risk scenarios can help to expand the scope and coverage of the risk management process, and to address the emerging or changing risks, but it does not update the existing risk scenarios or the risk response plan. Implementing additional controls is a part of the risk response process, which selects and executes the appropriate actions to reduce, avoid, share, or exploit the risk. Implementing additional controls can help to mitigate the risk and achieve the desired risk level, but it is not the first or the only option, as it depends on the risk appetite, tolerance, and capacity of the organization, and the cost-benefit analysis of the controls. References = Risk Register Template and Examples | Prioritize and Manage Risk, How to Write Strong Risk Scenarios and Statements - ISACA, IT Risk Resources | ISACA

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics used by organizations to monitor and assess potential risks that may impact their objectives and performance. KRIs also provide early warning signals that help organizations identify, analyze, and address risks before they escalate into significant issues1. Effective KRIs are those that are relevant, measurable, predictable, comparable, and informational2. The most important factor for developing effective KRIs is including input from risk and business unit management, as they are the persons who have the best understanding of the risk environment, the risk appetite and tolerance, and the risk factors and impacts of the organization. By including input from risk and business unit management, the organization can ensure that the KRIs are aligned with the organization’s strategy, vision, and mission, and that they reflect the current and emerging risks and their potential consequences. Engaging sponsorship by senior management, utilizing data and resources internal to the organization, and developing in collaboration with internal audit are not the most important factors for developing effective KRIs, as they do not provide the same level of insight and relevance as including input from risk and business unit management. Engaging sponsorship by senior management is a factor that involves obtaining the support and approval of the senior leaders who have the authority and accountability for the organization’s performance and governance. Engaging sponsorship by senior management can help to promote the importance and value of KRIs, and to ensure their communication and implementation across the organization, but it does not ensure that the KRIs are appropriate and accurate for the organization’s risk profile. Utilizing data and resources internal to the organization is a factor that involves using the information and assets that are available within the organization to support or enable the development of KRIs. Utilizing data and resources internal to the organization can help to enhance the quality and reliability of KRIs, and to reduce the cost and complexity of obtaining external data and resources, but it does not ensure that the KRIs are comprehensive and consistent with the organization’s risk environment. Developing in collaboration with internal audit is a factor that involves working with the internal audit function that provides independent and objective assurance and advice on the adequacy and effectiveness of the organization’s risk management. Developing in collaboration with internal audit can help to improve the validity and compliance of KRIs, and to provide feedback and recommendations for improvement, but it does not ensure that the KRIs are relevant and realistic for the organization’s risk objectives and strategies. References = 1: Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture2: KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva3: [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: Key Risk Indicators, pp. 181-185.]

The process owner is the stakeholder who is responsible for the business process that will be supported by the new IT solution. The process owner has the best knowledge of the business requirements, objectives, and risks associated with the process. The process owner can provide the most relevant information for analyzing the risk associated with the new IT solution, such as the expected benefits, costs, performance, functionality, security, and compliance of the solution. The process owner can also help to identify and evaluate the potential impact and likelihood of the risk scenarios related to the new IT solution. The other stakeholders may have some information or insights, but they are not as directly involved or affected by the new IT solution as the process owner. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1.1, pp. 58-59.

The business process owner is the stakeholder who is responsible for the business process that is supported by the IT system, such as the CRM system. The business process owner has the authority and accountability to manage the risk and its response associated with the business process and the IT system. The business process owner should own the risk of customer data leakage caused by insufficient IT security controls for the new system, as it directly affects the performance, functionality, and compliance of the business process. The other options are not the correct answer, as they involve different roles or responsibilities in the risk management process:

The chief information security officer is the senior executive who oversees the enterprise-wide information security program, and provides guidance and direction to the information security managers and practitioners. The chief information security officer may advise or support the business process owner in managing the risk of customer data leakage, but does not own the risk.

The chief risk officer is the senior executive who oversees the enterprise-wide risk management program, and provides guidance and direction to the risk managers and practitioners. The chief risk officer may advise or support the business process owner in managing the risk of customer data leakage, but does not own the risk.

The IT controls manager is the person who designs, implements, and monitors the IT controls that mitigate the IT risks, such as the IT security controls for the new system. The IT controls manager may advise or support the business process owner in managing the risk of customer data leakage, but does not own the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1.1, pp. 95-96.