Presenting the impact of IT risks on organizational processes in monetary terms is effective for obtaining management buy-in because it directly relates to the organization's financial health and decision-making. It provides a clear and tangible understanding of the potential financial implications of risks, making it easier for management to appreciate the need for additional controls.

The organization's process owner should own the risk of exposing the payroll data due to a control weakness at the third party, because the process owner is the person who is responsible for the business process that generates, uses, or transfers the payroll data. The process owner should also ensure that the third party complies with the contractual obligations and service level agreements that define the expected performance and security standards of the payroll data processing. The other options are not the correct answers, because they are not the primary owners of the risk, although they may also be involved in the risk management process. The third party's IT operations manager, the third party's chief risk officer (CRO), and the organization's risk practitioner are examples of secondary owners or stakeholders of the risk, who may provide support, guidance, or oversight to the risk owner, but they are not accountable for the risk or the risk response strategy. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

The best course of action when risk is found to be above the acceptable risk appetite is to execute the risk response plan, which is the set of actions and measures that are designed to reduce, avoid, transfer, or accept the risk. The risk response plan is based on the risk assessment results, the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, and the cost-benefit analysis of the risk response options. The risk response plan helps to achieve the optimal balance between the potential benefits and threats of the risk, and to align the risk decisions with the organizational objectives and context. The other options are not the best courses of action, as they are either too passive or too reactive in dealing with the risk. Reviewing risk tolerance levels may help to adjust the acceptable variation between the risk thresholds and the business objectives, but it does not address the actual risk level or impact. Maintaining the current controls may help to prevent the risk from increasing further, but it does not reduce the existing risk exposure or mitigation. Analyzing the effectiveness of controls may help to identify the gaps or weaknesses in the current risk management, but it does not implement the necessary improvements or changes. References = Risk Response Plan in Project Management:
Key Strategies & Tips; A Practitioner's Guide to Ethical Decision Making; How to Manage Project Risk: A 5- Step Guide

A control self-assessment (CSA) is a technique that allows managers and work teams directly involved in business units, functions, or processes to participate in assessing the organization's risk management and control processes. The main purpose of conducting a CSA is to gain a better understanding of the control effectiveness in the organization, which means how well the controls are designed, implemented, and operated to achieve the desired outcomes and mitigate the risks. A CSA can help to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the existing controls, as well as the gaps and opportunities for improvement. A CSA can also help to enhance the awareness, ownership, and accountability of the control environment among the managers and staff. The other options are not the main purpose of conducting a CSA, although they may be related or beneficial. Gaining a better understanding of the risk in the organization is a result of conducting a CSA, but it is not the primary goal. The primary goal is to evaluate the controls that address the risks, not the risks themselves. Adjusting the controls prior to an external audit is a possible action that may follow a CSA, but it is not the reason for conducting a CSA. The reason for conducting a CSA is to improve the control effectiveness, not to prepare for an audit. Reducing the dependency on external audits is a potential benefit of conducting a CSA, but it is not the objective of conducting a CSA. The objective of conducting a CSA is to enhance the internal control assurance, not to replace the external audit assurance. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 153-1541; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 802

According to the CRISC Review Manual, a list of unencrypted databases which contain sensitive data would be the most important information for assessing the risk impact, because it would help to determine the extent and severity of the potential data breach or loss. The risk impact is the effect or consequence of the risk occurrence on the business objectives and operations. A list of unencrypted databases which contain sensitive data would indicate the scope and magnitude of the risk exposure and the potential damage to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the data. The other options are not the most important information for assessing the risk impact, as they are less relevant or less specific than a list of unencrypted databases which contain sensitive data. The number of users who can access sensitive data would indicate the level of access control and the likelihood of unauthorized access, but it would not indicate the type and value of the data. The reason some databases have not been encrypted would indicate the cause and rationale of the risk, but it would not indicate the effect or consequence of the risk. The cost required to enforce encryption would indicate the feasibility and affordability of the risk response, but it would not indicate the potential loss or harm of the risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.2, page 78.