The risk practitioner's best recommendation is to consider providing additional system resources to this job, as this would help to reduce the likelihood and impact of the risk of delaying financial reporting. Providing additional system resources, such as memory, CPU, disk space, or bandwidth, can improve the performance and efficiency of the application and the scheduled job. This can also help to avoid potential errors, failures, or interruptions that could affect the quality and timeliness of the financial data and reporting.
The other options are not the best recommendations for this situation. Implementing database activity and capacity monitoring is a good practice to identify and analyze the root causes of performance issues, but it does not directly address the risk of delaying financial reporting. Ensuring the business is aware of the risk is an important step to communicate and escalate the risk, but it does not provide a solution or mitigation strategy. Ensuring the enterprise has a process to detect such situations is a preventive measure to avoid or minimize the occurrence of the risk, but it does not eliminate or reduce the risk. References = Practical Recommendations for Better Enterprise Risk Management - ISACA, HR Risk Management: A Practitioner's Guide - AIHR, Isaca CRISC today updated questions - Verified by Isaca Experts

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide an early warning of increasing risk exposure in various areas of the organization. They help to monitor changes in the level of risk and enable timely actions to mitigate the risk. The major advantage of using KRIs is that they identify when risk exceeds defined thresholds, which are the acceptable or tolerable levels of risk that the organization has established. By identifying when risk exceeds defined thresholds, the KRIs can alert the management and stakeholders of the need to take corrective or preventive measures, and avoid or reduce the potential losses or damages.
References = 3

The potential loss to the business due to non-performance of the asset is the most helpful information for asset owners when classifying organizational assets for risk assessment, because it reflects the value and criticality of the asset to the business objectives and processes. The potential loss can be measured in terms of financial, operational, reputational, or legal impacts. The known emerging environmental threats are not relevant for asset classification, because they are external factors that affect the risk level, not the asset value. The known vulnerabilities published by the asset developer are not relevant for asset classification, because they are internal factors that affect the risk level, not the asset value. The cost of replacing the asset with a new asset providing similar services is not relevant for asset classification, because it does not reflect the business impact of losing the asset functionality or availability. References = CRISC Sample Questions 2024

Section: Volume D