Establish Effective Security Governance & Management

The key is in stakeholder interactions, not policy and process.

Analyst Perspective

It's about stakeholder interactions, not policy and process.

Many security leaders complain about a lack of governance and management in their organizations. They have policies and processes but find neither have had the expected impact and that the organization is teetering on the edge of lawlessness, with stakeholder groups operating in ways that interfere with each other (usually due to poorly defined accountabilities).

Among the most common examples is security's relationship to the business. When these groups don't align, they tend to see each other as adversaries and make decisions in line with their respective positions: security endorses one standard, the business adopts another.

The consequences of this are vast. Such an organization is effectively opposed to itself. No wonder policy and process have not resolved the issue.

At a practical level, good governance stems from understanding how different stakeholder groups interact, providing inputs and outputs to each other and modeling who is accountable for what. But this implied accountability model needs to be formalized (perhaps even modified) before governance can help all stakeholder groups operate as strategic partners with clearly defined roles, responsibilities, and decision-making power. Only when policies and processes reflect this will they serve as effective tools to support governance.

Logan Rohde
Senior Research Analyst, Security & Privacy
Info-Tech Research Group

Executive Summary

Info-Tech Insight
Good governance stems from a deep understanding of how stakeholder groups interact with each other and their respective accountabilities and responsibilities. Without these things, organizational functions tend to interfere with each other, blurring the lines between governance and management and promoting ad hoc decision making that undermines governance.

Your challenge

This research is designed to help organizations who need to:

• Establish security governance from scratch.
• Improve security governance despite a lack of cooperation from the business.
• Determine the accountabilities and responsibilities of each stakeholder group.

This blueprint will solve the above challenges by helping you model your organization's governance structure and implement processes to support the essential governance areas: policy, risk, and performance metrics.

Percentage of organizations that have yet to fully advance to a maturity-based approach to security

70%

Source: McKinsey, 2021

Common obstacles

These barriers make this challenge difficult to address for many organizations:

• The business does not wish to be governed and does not seek to align with security on the basis of risk.
• Various stakeholder groups essentially govern themselves, causing business functions to interfere with each other.
• Security teams struggle to differentiate between governance and management and the purpose of each.

Early adopter infrastructure

63%
Security leaders not reporting to the board about risk or incident detection and prevention.
Source: LogRhythm, 2021

46%
Those who report that senior leadership is confident cybersecurity leaders understand business goals.
Source: LogRhythm, 2021

Governance isn't just policy and process

Governance is often mistaken for an organization's formalized policies and processes. While both are important governance supports, they do not provide governance in and of themselves.

For governance to work well, an organization needs to understand how stakeholder groups interact with each other. What inputs and outputs do they provide? Who is accountable? Who is responsible? These are the questions one needs to ask before designing a governance structure. Failing to account for any of these three elements tends to result in overlap, inefficiency, and a lack of accountability, creating flawed governance.

Separate governance from management

Oversight versus operations

• COBIT emphasizes the importance of separating governance from management. These are complementary functions, but they refer to different parts of organizational operation.
• Governance provides a decision-making apparatus based on predetermined requirements to ensure smooth operations. It is used to provide oversight and direction and hinges on established accountabilities
• Simply put, governance refers to what an organization is and is not willing to permit in day-to-day operations, and it tends to make its presence known via the key areas of risk appetite, formal policy and process, and exception handling.
• Note: These key areas do not provide governance in and of themselves. Rather, governance emerges in accordance with the decisions an organization has made regarding these areas. Sometimes, however, these "decisions" have not been formally or consciously made and the current state of the organization's operations becomes the default - even when it is not working well.
• Management, by contrast, is concerned with executing business processes in accordance with the governance model, essentially, governance provides guidance for how to make decisions during daily management.

"Information security governance is the guiding hand that organizes and directs risk mitigation efforts into a business-aligned strategy for the entire organization."

Steve Durbin,
Chief Executive,
Information Security Forum, Forbes, 2023

Models for governance and management

Info-Tech's Governance and Management research uses the logic of COBIT's governance and management framework but distills this guidance into a practical, easy-to-implement series of steps, moving beyond the rudimentary logic of COBIT to provide an actionable and personalized governance model.

Clear accountabilities and responsibilities

Complementary frameworks to simplify governance and management

The distinction that COBIT draws between governance and management is roughly equivalent to that of accountability and responsibility, as seen in the RACI* model.

There can be several stakeholders responsible for something, but only one party can be accountable.

Use this guidance to help determine the accountabilities and responsibilities of your governance and management model.

*Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed

Security governance framework

A security governance framework is a system that will design structures, processes, accountability definitions, and membership assignments that lead the security department toward optimal results for the business.

Governance is performed in three ways:

"Governance specifies the accountability framework and provides oversight to ensure that risks are adequately mitigated, while management ensures that controls are implemented to mitigate risks. Management recommends security strategies. Governance ensures that security strategies are aligned with business objectives and consistent with regulations."
- EDUCAUSE