The number of suspected malicious activities reported since the policy's implementation directly measures the policy's effectiveness in identifying and mitigating insider threats. This aligns with Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) used to evaluate control outcomes.

*A risk treatment plan is a document that describes the actions and resources needed to implement the chosen risk response strategy for each identified risk1. A risk response strategy is the way an organization decides to address a risk, such as avoiding, accepting, mitigating, or transferring it2.
*Sometimes, a risk treatment plan may not be completed on time due to various reasons, such as delays, resource constraints, technical issues, or changes in the risk environment. In such cases, the best approach is to implement compensating controls until the preferred action can be completed3.
*Compensating controls are alternative or additional controls that provide a similar level of assurance or protection as the original controls, when the latter are not feasible or sufficient3. Compensating controls can help to reduce the residual risk or maintain the risk within the acceptable level until the risk treatment plan is fully executed3.
*For example, if the risk treatment plan involves installing a firewall to protect the network from external threats, but the firewall is not available or compatible with the current system, a compensating control could be to use encryption, authentication, or monitoring tools to secure the network traffic until the firewall is installed3.
*Implementing compensating controls is better than the other options because it allows the organization to continue with the risk treatment plan while maintaining an adequate level of security and compliance. The other options are not advisable for the following reasons:
oReplacing the action owner with a more experienced individual (option A) may not solve the problem if the issue is not related to the action owner's competence or performance. Moreover, replacing the action owner may cause disruption, confusion, or conflict in the risk management process.
oChanging the risk response strategy of the relevant risk to risk avoidance (option C) may not be possible or desirable if the risk is associated with a critical or beneficial activity or process. Risk avoidance means eliminating the source of the risk or discontinuing the activity that causes the risk2. This may result in losing opportunities, benefits, or value for the organization.
oDeveloping additional key risk indicators (KRIs) until the preferred action can be completed (option D) may not be effective or efficient if the existing KRIs are already sufficient to monitor and measure the risk. KRIs are metrics or data points that provide early warning signals or information about the level or trend of a risk456. Developing additional KRIs may not reduce the risk or improve the risk treatment plan, but may increase the complexity and cost of the risk management process.
References =
*Key Risk Indicators: Examples & Definitions - SolveXia
*Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture
*Complete Guide to Key Risk Indicators - RiskOptics
*Risk Response Plan in Project Management: Key Strategies & Tips
*Risk response strategies: mitigation, transfer, avoidance, acceptance - Twproject: project management software,resource management, time tracking, planning, Gantt, kanban
*Risk Response Strategies: A Guide to Navigating Uncertainty - Teamly
*Compensating Controls | Audit and Compliance | Pathlock

According to the ISACA CRISC Review Manual, an enterprise risk management (ERM) process is a holistic approach to identifying, analyzing, responding to, and monitoring all types of risk that affect the achievement of the enterprise's objectives. The ERM process should consider all types of risk, including strategic, operational, financial, compliance, and reputational risks. Among these, strategic risks are the most important, as they have the potential to affect the enterprise's mission, vision, and goals. Therefore, risk with strategic impact should be included in the ERM process. References = ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 17.

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics or measures that provide information on the current or potential exposure and performance of an organization in relation to specific risks. KRIs can help to monitor and track the changes or trends in the risk level and the risk response over time, identify and alert the risk issues or events that require attention or action, evaluate and report the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management processes and practices, and support and inform the risk decision making and improvement1.
The best way to enable the identification of trends in risk levels is to ensure that the correlation between risk levels and KRIs is positive, because it means that the KRIs are aligned with and reflective of the risk levels, and that they can capture and indicate the variations or movements in the risk levels accurately and reliably. A positive correlation between risk levels and KRIs can be achieved by:
* Selecting and defining the KRIs that are relevant and appropriate for the specific risks that the organization faces, and that are consistent and comparable across different domains and contexts
* Collecting and analyzing the data and information that are reliable and sufficient for the KRIs, and that are sourced from various methods and sources, such as risk assessments, audits, monitoring, alerts, or incidents
* Applying and using the tools and techniques that are suitable and feasible for the KRIs, such as risk matrices, risk registers, risk indicators, or risk models
* Reviewing and updating the KRIs periodically or as needed, and ensuring that they reflect the current or accurate risk levels, which may change over time or due to external factors23 The other options are not the best ways to enable the identification of trends in risk levels, but rather some of the factors or aspects of KRIs. Measurements for KRIs are repeatable is a factor that can enhance the reliability and validity of the KRIs, as it means that the KRIs can produce the same or similar results under the same or similar conditions. However, repeatability does not necessarily imply accuracy or sensitivity, and it may not capture or reflect the changes or trends in the risk levels. Quantitative measurements are used for KRIs is an aspect that can improve the objectivity and precision of the KRIs, as it means that the KRIs are expressed in numerical or measurable values, such as percentages, probabilities, or monetary amounts.
However, quantitative measurements may not be suitable or feasible for all types of risks or KRIs, and they may not capture or reflect the complexity or uncertainty of the risk levels. Qualitative definitions for KRIs are used is an aspect that can enhance the understanding and communication of the KRIs, as it means that the KRIs are expressed in descriptive or subjective terms, such as high, medium, or low, based on criteria such as likelihood, impact, or severity. However, qualitative definitions may not be consistent or comparable across different risks or KRIs, and they may not capture or reflect the magnitude or variation of the risk levels.
References =
* Key Risk Indicators: What They Are and How to Use Them
* Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture
* Key Risk Indicators: Types and Examples
* [CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

The management action that will most likely change the likelihood rating of a risk scenario related to remote network access is implementing multi-factor authentication. Multi-factor authentication is a technique that requires the user to provide two or more pieces of evidence to verify their identity, such as a password, a token, or a biometric factor. Multi-factor authentication can help to reduce the likelihood of unauthorized or malicious access to the remote network, as it adds an extra layer of security and makes it harder for the attackers to compromise the user credentials. The other options are not as likely to change the likelihood rating of the risk scenario, as they are related to the update, creation, or maintenance of the remote network access, not the verification or protection of the remote network access. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.