All CRISC Test Inside Isaca Questions

Reassessing the risk profile is the first course of action that a risk practitioner should take after a hospital recently implemented a new technology to allow virtual patient appointments. This is because reassessing the risk profile can help identify, analyze, and evaluate the new or changed risks that the new technology may introduce or affect, such as data privacy, security, quality, reliability, or compliance risks. Reassessing the risk profile can also help determine the appropriate risk response and mitigation strategies, as well as monitor and report the risk performance and outcomes. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, reassessing the risk profile is one of the key steps in the IT risk management process1. According to the web search results, reassessing the risk profile is a common and recommended practice for addressing the risks of virtual patient appointments

The most useful tool for measuring the existing risk management process against a desired state is the capability maturity model, as it provides a structured and standardized way to assess the current and target levels of maturity, performance, and effectiveness of the risk management process, and to identify the gaps and improvement opportunities. The balanced scorecard, the risk management framework, and the risk scenario analysis are not the most useful tools, as they are more related to the evaluation, design, or identification of the risk management process, respectively, rather than the measurement of the risk management process. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

Business impact analysis (BIA) is the most helpful tool in identifying loss magnitude during risk analysis of a new system, as it involves estimating the potential financial and operational losses resulting from the disruption or degradation of the system. Recovery time objective (RTO), cost-benefit analysis, and cyber insurance coverage are not the most helpful tools, as they are more related to the recovery, evaluation, and transfer of the risk, respectively, rather than the identification of the loss magnitude. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 108.

The greatest challenge for a risk practitioner during a merger of two organizations is the variances between organizational risk appetites, as they may indicate a significant difference in the risk culture, strategy, and objectives of the two organizations, and may require a complex and lengthy process of alignment and integration. Different taxonomies to categorize risk scenarios, disparate platforms for governance, risk, and compliance (GRC) systems, and dissimilar organizational risk acceptance protocols are not the greatest challenges, as they are more related to the technical, operational, or procedural aspects of risk management, rather than the strategic or cultural aspects of risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.