Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:
The CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, in its Governance of Enterprise IT domain, addresses ethical governance and policy enforcement. When ethical violations occur, the first step is to conduct a root cause analysis to identify why policies failed (e.g., lack of oversight, inadequate controls) and remediate based on findings. This ensures targeted solutions, such as enhanced monitoring or training. The manual likely references COBIT 2019's MEA03-Managed Compliance with External Requirements, which includes root cause analysis for governance issues.
* Option A: Revise policies is premature without understanding the cause.
* Option C: Document CSFs is unrelated to addressing violations.
* Option D: Strict penalties may deter but don't address underlying issues.
Double Verification: The answer aligns with COBIT's MEA03 and the CGEIT domain's focus on ethical governance. Root cause analysis is a standard ISACA response to policy failures.
ISACA CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, Domain 1: Governance of Enterprise IT (focus on ethical governance).
COBIT 2019, MEA03-Managed Compliance with External Requirements.
ISACA Glossary (for definitions of root cause analysis), available at https://www.isaca.org/resources/glossary.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:
The CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, in its Governance of Enterprise IT domain, addresses vendor management in regulated environments. Third-party audit reports provide independent verification that cloud vendors comply with stringent regulatory requirements (e.g., GDPR, HIPAA), offering evidence of controls and certifications (e.g., SOC 2, ISO 27001). These reports are critical for due diligence. The manual likely references COBIT 2019's APO10-Managed Vendors, which emphasizes third-party assurance for compliance.
* Option A: Stage gate reviews are project management checkpoints, not vendor compliance tools.
* Option B: Risk assessment evaluates risks but lacks independent verification.
* Option C: Internal audit report assesses internal controls, not vendor compliance.
Double Verification: The answer aligns with COBIT's APO10 and the CGEIT domain's focus on vendor governance. Third-party audits are a standard ISACA requirement for vendor compliance.
ISACA CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, Domain 1: Governance of Enterprise IT (focus on vendor management).
COBIT 2019, APO10-Managed Vendors.
ISACA Glossary (for definitions of third-party audit), available at https://www.isaca.org/resources/glossary.

This is because a risk program is a strategic initiative that requires the support and involvement of the top leaders of the enterprise. Senior management can demonstrate their commitment to the risk program by:
Providing clear direction and guidance on the objectives, scope, and approach of the risk program Allocating sufficient resources, budget, and authority to the risk program team Communicating the importance and benefits of the risk program to all stakeholders Encouraging a culture of risk awareness and accountability across the enterprise Reviewing and approving the risk program deliverables and outcomes Rewarding and recognizing the achievements and contributions of the risk program team and participants A risk management framework (A) is a tool that helps to define and implement the risk program, but it does not ensure its success without senior management commitment. Mandatory risk awareness courses for staff (B) are a way to increase the knowledge and skills of the staff regarding risk management, but they do not guarantee their engagement and participation in the risk program without senior management endorsement. A risk recognition and reporting policy is a document that establishes the rules and procedures for identifying and communicatingrisks, but it does not ensure its compliance and effectiveness without senior management oversight.

Monitoring the adoption of a new IT strategy requires measurable indicators that track progress and alignment with strategic objectives. The CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition highlights that key performance indicators (KPIs) are the primary tool for monitoring strategy implementation, as they measure performance against defined goals.
* Extract from CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition (Domain 4: Strategic Management):"Key performance indicators (KPIs) are essential for monitoring the implementation and adoption of an IT strategy. KPIs provide measurable data on progress toward strategic objectives, enabling the IT steering committee to assess effectiveness and make informed adjustments." (Approximate reference: Domain 4, Section on Strategy Monitoring) Establishing KPIs (option B) allows the IT steering committee to track the strategy's success, identify gaps, and ensure alignment with enterprise goals, making it the best approach for monitoring adoption.
* Why not the other options?
* A. Implement service level agreements (SLAs): SLAs are operational agreements for service delivery, not strategic monitoring tools.
* C. Schedule ongoing audit reviews: Audits provide assurance but are periodic and not designed for ongoing strategy monitoring.
* D. Establish key risk indicators (KRIs): KRIs focus on risk exposure, not on measuring strategy adoption or performance.
References:
ISACA CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, Domain 4: Strategic Management, Section on Performance Measurement and Monitoring.
ISACA CGEIT Study Guide, Chapter on IT Strategy Implementation.

The most important reason for selecting IT key risk indicators (KRIs) is to increase the probability of achieving IT goals. IT KRIs are metrics that show the level of exposure or likelihood of occurrence of IT-related risks that may affect the achievement of IT objectives. By selecting and monitoring IT KRIs, the organization can identify and manage the potential threats and opportunities that may impact the IT performance and value. IT KRIs can also help to trigger corrective or preventive actions, communicate risk information, and support decision-making and improvement processes