This is the best way to mitigate the human factors of social engineering risk within the organization from a governance perspective, as it helps to educate and empower the employees to recognize and prevent social engineering attacks. Social engineering attacks are malicious attacks that use deception and manipulation to exploit human behavior and trick people into revealing sensitive information, clicking malicious links, or opening malicious files1. These attacks can cause serious damage to the organization, such as financial loss, data breach, reputation harm, or legal liability1. Therefore, it is essential to address the human factors of social engineering risk, which are the psychological and emotional vulnerabilities that make people susceptible to these attacks, such as curiosity, greed, fear, urgency, or trust2. By mandating annual security awareness training, the organization can raise the level of knowledge and awareness among the employees about the common types, techniques, and indicators of social engineering attacks, as well as the best practices and policies to avoid them2. Security awareness training can also help to foster a culture of security and responsibility among the employees, and to reinforce their role and accountability in protecting the organization's assets and interests2. The other options are not as effective as mandating annual security awareness training, as they do not address the human factors of social engineering risk directly. Distributing the social media information security policy to staff may help to inform them about the rules and expectations for using social media platforms, but it does not ensure that they understand or follow them. Restricting access to social media may help to reduce the exposure to potential social engineering attacks, but it does not prevent them from occurring through other channels or mediums. Mandating security requirements be included in employee contracts may help to enforce compliance and deter violations, but it does not prevent them from happening due to ignorance or negligence.

Revalidating the organization's risk tolerance and re-aligning the retention policy is the best option to ensure the optimization of retention costs, because it can help the organization balance the trade-off between the benefits and costs of data retention. By revalidating the risk tolerance, the organization can identify the optimal level of data retention that minimizes the exposure to legal, regulatory, and operational risks, while also reducing the storage and management costs. By re-aligning the retention policy, the organization can ensure that the data retention practices are consistent with the risk tolerance and reflect the current business needs and objectives. A re-aligned retention policy can also help the organization comply with data retention laws and regulations, avoid unnecessary data hoarding, and improve data quality and accessibility. References := Data Retention Policy 101: Best Practices, Examples & More - Intradyn, Data Retention 101: Policies and Best Practices | Egnyte, Best Practices for Data Retention and Policy Creation Will Optimize Storage Management, Data Retention Policy: Crafting Strategy for Compliance and Access

The impact of information exposure is the most important factor for an enterprise to review when classifying information assets, because it helps to determine the level of sensitivity and protection that the information assets require. Information assets are classified according to their confidentiality, integrity, and availability, which reflect the potential harm or loss that could result from unauthorized disclosure, modification, or destruction of the information assets. The impact of information exposure can be assessed in terms of financial, reputational, legal, operational, or strategic consequences for the enterprise and its stakeholders. The impact of information exposure can also vary depending on the context, scope, and duration of the exposure.
Therefore, by reviewing the impact of information exposure, an enterprise can assign appropriate labels and controls to its information assets, and ensure that they are handled and stored securely and appropriately. References := Information classification according to ISO27001, Information Asset and Security Classification Procedure, Information Classification Standard.

Performing stage-gate reviews throughout the life cycle of each project is the best way to ensure IT investment management processes are fully realizing the benefits identified in business cases. Stage-gate reviews provide structured checkpoints at critical phases of a project, allowing for the evaluation of progress, performance against objectives, and the continued viability and alignment with business goals. This approach enables timely adjustments to be made, ensuring that projects stay on track to deliver the expected benefits.
While CIO review and approval, evaluating delegation of authority, and documenting lessons learned are valuable, they do not offer the continuous oversight and opportunity for course correction that stage-gate reviews do.

The first step to strengthen and enforce current data governance practices after a data leakage incident is to verify data owners. Data owners are the individuals or groups who have the authority and responsibility to define, classify, protect, and manage the data assets of an enterprise1. By verifying data owners, the enterprise can ensure that the data is properly accounted for, categorized, and secured according to its value, sensitivity, and risk. Data owners can also establish data policies, standards, and procedures, as well as monitor and report on data quality, usage, and compliance1. Verifying data owners is a prerequisite for assessing data security controls, reviewing data logs, and analyzing data quality, as these activities depend on the accurate identification and assignment of data ownership roles and responsibilities. References: CGEIT Review Manual (Digital Version) or CGEIT Review Manual (Print Version), Chapter 4: Risk Optimization, Section
4.2: IT Risk Management Process, Subsection 4.2.1: IT Risk Identification, Page 163-164. Top 10 Effective Data Governance Tools.