The best way to prevent adverse effects to the enterprise resulting from the new technology is to develop key risk indicators (KRIs), because they are metrics that measure the potential impact and likelihood of the risks associated with the new technology, and provide early warning signals for taking corrective actions. KRIs can help the enterprise to monitor and manage the risks of integrating the new technology with the current IT infrastructure, and to ensure that the expected benefits and value are realized12. References := ISACA, CGEIT Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2019, page 75-76.

After receiving recommendations to improve the IT governance framework, the CIO must assess their feasibility to ensure they are practical and aligned with the enterprise's resources and goals. The CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition advises evaluating the feasibility of recommendations as the next step to prioritize and plan implementation.
* Extract from CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition (Domain 1: Governance of Enterprise IT):"Following a benchmark analysis, the CIO should evaluate the feasibility of recommendations, considering factors such as cost, resource availability, organizational readiness, and alignment with strategic objectives.
This assessment informs the prioritization and planning of implementation efforts." (Approximate reference: Domain 1, Section on Governance Framework Improvement) Evaluating the feasibility of the recommendations (option A) ensures that the CIO selects recommendations that are viable and beneficial, setting the stage for planning and approval.
* Why not the other options?
* B. Obtain approval from the IT steering committee to implement the recommendations: Approval is needed but follows feasibility assessment to ensure informed decision-making.
* C. Develop a plan to integrate the recommendations: Planning is premature without confirming which recommendations are feasible.
* D. Appoint a project manager to implement the recommendations: Appointing a project manager is a later step, after feasibility and planning.
References:
ISACA CGEIT Review Manual 8th Edition, Domain 1: Governance of Enterprise IT, Section on Framework Benchmarking and Improvement.
ISACA CGEIT Study Guide, Chapter on Governance Framework Enhancement.

Evaluating whether the vendor's BCP aligns with the enterprise's BCP is the most important consideration when selecting a vendor to provide services associated with a critical application, because it helps to ensure that the vendor can meet the service level agreements (SLAs) and recovery objectives of the enterprise in the event of a disruption or disaster. A BCP is a plan that defines how an organization will continue its critical business processes and functions during and after a crisis1. A vendor's BCP should be compatible and consistent with the enterprise's BCP, and should address the specific risks, impacts, and requirements of the service provision2. Evaluating whether the vendor's BCP aligns with the enterprise's BCP helps to avoid any gaps, conflicts, or issues that could affect the availability, performance, and quality of the service, and to ensure that the vendor can restore the service within an acceptable time frame3. Evaluating whether the vendor's BCP aligns with the enterprise's BCP also helps to comply with the regulatory and contractual obligations, and to protect the reputation and value of the enterprise4.
References := Business Continuity Planning (BCP) Definition, Business Continuity Planning for Vendors:
What You Need to Know, Vendor Business Continuity Plan: How to Ensure Your Vendors Are Prepared for Disasters, Business Continuity Planning for Vendors: 5 Steps to Success.

The most important thing to review during IT strategy development is the current business environment, as it reflects the internal and external factors that affect the enterprise's performance, objectives, and needs. The current business environment includes the analysis of the enterprise's strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT), as well as the assessment of the market trends, customer demands, competitor actions, and regulatory requirements. Reviewing the current business environment can help align the IT strategy with the business strategy, as well as identify and prioritize the IT initiatives and investments that can support and enable the enterprise's goals and value proposition.
Industry best practices, IT balanced scorecard, and data flows that indicate areas requiring IT support are also important things to review during IT strategy development, but they are not the most important thing. Industry best practices are the methods or techniques that have been proven to be effective or efficient in achieving a desired outcome or result in a specific domain or context. Industry best practices can help benchmark and improve the IT strategy, as well as adopt or adapt the best solutions or innovations from other enterprises or sectors. IT balanced scorecard is a set of metrics that measure the performance of IT in relation to the enterprise's vision, strategy, and goals. IT balanced scorecard can help evaluate and communicate the effectiveness and efficiency of IT strategy, as well as its contribution to customer satisfaction, business value, and innovation. Data flows that indicate areas requiring IT support are the diagrams or models that show how data is collected, processed, stored, and distributed within or across the enterprise's processes or systems.
Data flows can help identify and address the gaps or issues in IT service delivery or data management, as well as optimize or integrate the data systems or tools.

According to the CGEIT certification guide, the first governance step to address the email issue caused by the zero-tolerance policy regarding security is to obtain senior management inputbased on identified risk. This is because senior management is ultimately responsible for setting the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise, and for balancing the security and business needs. The zero-tolerance policy may be too restrictive and may not align with the enterprise's risk profile and objectives. Therefore, senior management input is needed to review and adjust the policy according to the risk assessment and analysis1. The other options are less appropriate as the first governance step, as they do not involve senior management input or risk-based decision making. References := CGEIT certification guide, domain 3: Risk Optimization, section 3.1: Risk Governance, page 87.