CGEIT Exam Dumps : Certified in the Governance of Enterprise IT Exam

 Quantitative analysis is the best method to assess the risk of plausible scenarios that could result in economic loss associated with major IT investments, because it tries to assign objective numerical or measurable values to the components of the risk assessment and to the assessment of potential loss1. Quantitative analysis can help estimate the probability and impact of risk events, calculate the expected monetary value (EMV) of risk, and compare the costs and benefits of different risk responses2. Quantitative analysis can also provide a more accurate and objective basis for decision making than qualitative analysis, which is scenario-based and relies on subjective judgments1. References := 1: Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative - ISACA12: 6 Types of Risk Assessment Methodologies + How to Choose - Drata2

The finding that should be of greatest concern to senior management is that response decisions were made without consulting the appropriate authority. This is because response decisions are critical actions that can affect the outcome and impact of a security incident, and they should be made by the designated authority who has the responsibility and accountability for the incident response. According to CISA, the Department of Justice, through the FBI and the NCIJTF, is the lead agency for threat response during a significant incident, with DHS’s investigative agencies—the Secret Service and ICE/HSI - playing a crucial role in criminal investigations1. If response decisions are made without consulting the appropriate authority, it may result in:

• Legal or regulatory violations: The response actions may not comply with the applicable laws or regulations, such as data breach notification, evidence preservation, or privacy protection. This may expose the organization to legal or regulatory penalties, lawsuits, or reputational damage.
• Ineffective or counterproductive actions: The response actions may not be aligned with the incident response plan, best practices, or standard operating procedures. This may cause more harm than good, such as escalating the incident, destroying evidence, or compromising recovery efforts.
• Lack of coordination and communication: The response actions may not be coordinated or communicated with the relevant stakeholders, such as senior management, legal counsel, public relations, or external partners. This may lead to confusion, inconsistency, or mistrust among the parties involved in the incident response.

Therefore, senior management should be most concerned about the finding that response decisions were made without consulting the appropriate authority, and they should take corrective actions to prevent this from happening again in the future. References: Cybersecurity Incident Response | CISA1

The primary role of the CEO in IT governance is establishing enterprise strategic goals. The CEO is responsible for setting the vision and strategic direction of the organization, which includes ensuring that IT governance aligns with and supports these broader objectives. While managing the risk governance process, evaluating ROI, and nominating IT steering committee membership are important, these are typically shared responsibilities or delegated to other roles within the organization. The CEO's leadership in defining the strategic goals is fundamental to guiding all aspects of IT governance and ensuring alignment with the business strategy.