The best way to mitigate the risk of reputational damage from inappropriate use of social media sites by employees is to implement training and awareness programs that educate them on the acceptable and unacceptable use of social media, the potential consequences of violating the policy, and the best practices for protecting the organization's reputation and information. Training and awareness programs can also help to foster a culture of risk awareness and responsibility among employees, and encourage them to report any incidents or issues related to social media use. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.4, page 131.

Conducting phishing exercises would best help minimize the risk associated with social engineering threats, because they can help to raise awareness and educate employees about the common techniques and tactics used by social engineers, such as sending deceptive emails or text messages that ask for sensitive information or direct users to malicious websites. Phishing exercises are simulated attacks that test the employees' ability to recognize and respond to social engineering attempts, and provide feedback and guidance on how to improve their security behavior. By conducting phishing exercises, the organization can measure and improve the employees' level of security awareness and resilience, and reduce the likelihood and impact of falling victim to social engineering attacks. The other options are less effective ways to minimize the risk associated with social engineering threats. Enforcing employees' sanctions can help to deter and punish employees who violate the security policies or procedures, but it may not prevent or reduce the occurrence of social engineering attacks, as they may target employees who are unaware, careless, or coerced by the attackers.
Enforcing segregation of duties can help to prevent or limit the damage caused by social engineering attacks, by restricting the access and authority of employees to perform certain tasks or functions, but it may not address the root cause or source of the attacks, which is the human factor. Reviewing the organization's risk appetite can help to define and communicate the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, but it may not directly affect or influence the employees' behavior or attitude toward social engineering threats, which may depend on their individual or situational factors.
References = How to Prevent and Mitigate Social Engineering Attacks 1

Showing projected residual risk is the most helpful way to respond to the request of explaining how existing risk treatment plans would affect risk posture at the end of the year. Residual risk is the level of risk that remains after the implementation of risk responses1. Projected residual risk is the estimated level of risk that will remain at a future point in time, based on the assumptions and expectations of the risk responses2. By showing projected residual risk, the risk practitioner can:
* Demonstrate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk treatment plans, and how they reduce the risk level from the inherent risk (the risk before the risk responses) to the residual risk3.
* Compare the projected residual risk with the risk appetite and tolerance, which are the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives4. This can help to determine whether the projected residual risk is acceptable or not, and whether the risk treatment plans are consistent and proportional to the risk level5.
* Identify and address any gaps, issues, or challenges that may affect the achievement of the projected residual risk, and recommend and implement appropriate improvement actions or contingency plans6.
The other options are not the most helpful ways to respond to the request, because:
* Assessing risk with no controls in place is not the most helpful way, as it does not reflect the current or future risk posture of the organization. Controls are the measures or actions that are implemented to modify the risk, such as prevent, detect, correct, or mitigate the risk7. Assessing risk with no controls in place can help to measure the inherent risk, but it does not show the impact or outcome of the risk treatment plans.
* Providing peer benchmarking results is not the most helpful way, as it does not reflect the specific or unique risk profile of the organization. Peer benchmarking is the process of comparing the organization' s risk level and performance with its peers or competitors, based on a common set of criteria or indicators8. Providing peer benchmarking results can help to provide a reference or a standard for the risk posture, but it does not show the effect or result of the risk treatment plans.
* Assessing risk with current controls in place is not the most helpful way, as it does not reflect the future or projected risk posture of the organization. Assessing risk with current controls in place can help to measure the current residual risk, but it does not show the expected or estimated residual risk at the end of the year.
References =
* Residual Risk - CIO Wiki
* Projected Residual Risk - CIO Wiki
* Risk Treatment Plan - CIO Wiki
* Risk Appetite and Tolerance - CIO Wiki
* Risk Appetite: What It Is and Why It Matters - Gartner
* Risk Monitoring and Review - The National Academies Press
* Control - CIO Wiki
* Benchmarking - CIO Wiki
* [Risk Treatment - CIO Wiki]

Identifying risk events is essential for developing realistic and relevant risk scenarios. This step enables the creation of scenarios that reflect actual vulnerabilities and potential disruptions, adhering to the CRISC's focus on Risk Identification.

To help identify high-risk situations, an organization should continuously monitor the environment, as it can help to detect and respond to any changes or emerging risks that may affect the organization's objectives and strategy. Continuous monitoring can also provide timely and relevant feedback and information to the decision-makers and stakeholders, and enable them to adjust the risk strategy and response actions accordingly. Continuous monitoring can also help to ensure that the risk management process is aligned with the organization's risk appetite and tolerance, and supports the achievement of the organization's goals and value creation. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 243. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 243. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 243.