The most important thing to determine when conducting a post-implementation review is whether success criteria have been achieved. A post-implementation review is a process of evaluating the results and outcomes of a project or initiative after it has been completed and implemented. The success criteria are the measurable indicators that define what constitutes a successful project or initiative in terms of its objectives, benefits, quality, performance, and stakeholder satisfaction. The IS auditor should verify whether the success criteria have been achieved by comparing the actual results and outcomes with the expected or planned ones, and by assessing whether they meet or exceed the expectations and requirements of the stakeholders. The IS auditor should also identify any gaps, issues, or risks that may affect the sustainability or scalability of the project or initiative, and provide recommendations for improvement or remediation. The other options are not as important as determining whether success criteria have been achieved when conducting a post- implementation review, because they either focus on specific aspects or components of the project or initiative rather than theoverall value proposition, or they are part of the pre-implementation or implementation phases rather than the post-implementation phase. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.3

The best way to help ensure new IT implementations align with enterprise architecture (EA) principles and requirements is to conduct EA reviews as part of the change advisory board (CAB). A CAB is a committee that evaluates and authorizes changes to IT services, such as new IT implementations. By conducting EA reviews as part of the CAB process, the organization can ensure that the proposed changes are consistent with the EA vision, goals, standards, and guidelines. This can help avoid potential conflicts, risks, or inefficiencies that may arise from misaligned IT implementations. Additionally, EA reviews can help identify opportunities for improvement, optimization, or innovation in the IT services.
The other options are not the best ways to help ensure new IT implementations align with EA principles and requirements. Documenting the security view as part of the EA is important, but it does not guarantee that new IT implementations will follow the security requirements or best practices. Considering stakeholder concerns when defining the EA is also essential, but it does not ensure that new IT implementations will meet the stakeholder expectations or needs. Performing mandatory post-implementation reviews of IT implementations is a good practice, but it does not prevent potential issues or problems that may arise from misaligned IT implementations.
References:
* 5: Change Advisory Board Best Practices: 15+ Industry Leaders Weigh In
* 6: What Does the Change Advisory Board (CAB) Do?
* 7: How do I set up an effective change advisory board? - ServiceNow
* 8: ITIL Change Management - The Role of the Change Advisory Board

This is the most effective way for the organization to improve its data classification processes and procedures, because data owners are the ones who are responsible for assigning the appropriate level of classification to the data they create, collect, or manage. Data owners should be aware of the data classification policy, the criteria for each level of classification, and the implications of misclassification. IT security staff can provide tailored training for data owners based on their roles, functions, and types of data they handle.
The other options are not as effective as having IT security staff conduct targeted training for data owners:
* Use automatic document classification based on content. This is a possible option, but it may not be feasible or accurate for a small organization. Automatic document classification is a process that uses artificial intelligence or machine learning to analyze the content of a document and assign a class label based on predefined rules or models. However, this process may require a lot of resources, expertise, and maintenance, and it may not capture all the nuances and context of the data. The IS auditor should also verify the reliability and validity of the automatic document classification system.
* Publish the data classification policy on the corporate web portal. This is a good practice, but it is not enough to improve the data classification situation. Publishing the data classification policy on the corporate web portal can increase the visibility and accessibility of the policy, but it does not ensure that data owners will read, understand, and follow it. The IS auditor should also monitor and enforce the compliance with the policy.
* Conduct awareness presentations and seminars for information classification policies. This is a useful measure, but it is not the most effective one. Conducting awareness presentations and seminars can raise the general awareness and knowledge of information classification policies among all employees, but it may not address the specific needs and challenges of data owners. The IS auditor should also provide more in-depth and practical training for data owners.

The most important thing to consider before including an audit of IT capacity management in the program is whether the system's performance poses a significant risk to the organization. IT capacity management is a process that ensures that IT resources are sufficient to meet current and future business needs, and that they are optimized for cost and performance. A poor IT capacity management can result in system slowdowns, outages, failures, or breaches, which can affect the availability, reliability, security, and efficiency of IT services and business processes. Therefore, before conducting an audit of IT capacity management, the auditor should assess the potential impact and likelihood of these risks on the organization's objectives, reputation, compliance, and customer satisfaction.
Whether system delays result in more frequent use of manual processing (option A) is not the most important thing to consider before including an audit of IT capacity management in the program, as it is only one possible consequence of poor IT capacity management. Manual processing can introduce errors, delays, inefficiencies, and inconsistencies in the data and reports, which can affect the quality and accuracy of financial information. However, manual processing is not the only or the worst outcome of poor IT capacity management; there may be other more severe or frequent risks that need to be considered.
Whether stakeholders are committed to assisting with the audit (option C) is also not the most important thing to consider before including an audit of IT capacity management in the program, as it is a factor that affects the feasibility and effectiveness of the audit, not the necessity or priority of it. Stakeholder commitment is important for ensuring that the auditor has access to relevant information, documents, data, and personnel, as well as for facilitating communication, collaboration, and feedback during the audit process. However, stakeholder commitment is not a sufficient reason to conduct an audit of IT capacity management; there must be a clear risk-based rationale for selecting this area for audit.
Whether internal auditors have the required skills to perform the audit (option D) is also not the most important thing to consider before including an audit of IT capacity management in the program, as it is a factor that affects the quality and credibility of the audit, not the urgency or importance of it. Internal auditors should have the appropriate knowledge, skills, and experience to perform an audit of IT capacity management, which may include technical, business, analytical, and communication skills. However, internal auditors can also acquire or supplement these skills through training, coaching, consulting, or outsourcing.
Therefore, internal auditors' skills are not a decisive factor for choosing this area for audit.
Therefore, option B is the correct answer.
References:
* Guide to IT Capacity Management | Smartsheet
* ISO 27001 capacity management: How to implement control A.12.1.3 - Advisera
* ISO 27002:2022 - Control 8.6 - Capacity Management

An audit report of the controls by the service provider's external auditor provides the best evidence that a third-party service provider's information security controls are effective. An external auditor is an independent and objective party that can assess the design and operating effectiveness of the service provider' s information security controls based on established standards and criteria. An external auditor can also provide an opinion on the adequacy and compliance of the service provider's information security controls, as well as recommendations for improvement.
Documentation of the service provider's security configuration controls is a source of evidence that a third- party service provider's information security controls are effective, but it is not the best evidence.
Documentation of the security configuration controls can show the settings and parameters of the service provider's information systems and networks, but it may not reflect the actual implementation and operation of the controls. Documentation of the security configuration controls may also be outdated, incomplete, or inaccurate.
An interview with the service provider's information security officer is a source of evidence that a third-party service provider's information security controls are effective, but it is not the best evidence. An interview with the information security officer can provide insights into the service provider's information security strategy, policies, and procedures, but it may not verify the actual performance and compliance of the information security controls. An interview with the information security officer may also be biased, subjective, or misleading.
A review of the service provider's policies and procedures is a source of evidence that a third-party service provider's information security controls are effective, but it is not the best evidence. A review of the policies and procedures can show the service provider's information security objectives, requirements, and guidelines, but it may not demonstrate the actual execution and enforcement of the information security controls. A review of the policies and procedures may also be insufficient, inconsistent, or outdated.
References:
* ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2019, p. 284
* ISACA, CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription