The risk practitioner should explain to senior management that mitigation plans for threat events should be prepared in the current planning period, as this would demonstrate a proactive and responsible approach to risk management. Mitigation plans are documents that outline the actions and resources needed to reduce the likelihood and/or impact of a specific risk scenario. Mitigation plans should include the following elements:
Risk scenario description and risk ID
Risk owner and other stakeholders
Risk response strategy and objectives
Risk response actions and tasks
Resources, costs, and benefits
Roles and responsibilities
Timeline and milestones
Performance indicators and monitoring mechanisms
Contingency plans and triggers
Mitigation plans help to address the gap between the current and desired risk levels and align the risk response with the organizational risk appetite and objectives. Mitigation plans also facilitate the communication, coordination, and collaboration among the risk owners and other stakeholders involved in the risk response process. Mitigation plans should be prepared in the current planning period, as this would allow the organization to act timely and effectively in the event of a low frequency threat event. Preparing mitigation plans in advance would also help to avoid or minimize the potential harm to the organization and its reputation.
The other options are not the best ways to communicate the associated risk to senior management. Explaining that this risk scenario is equivalent to more frequent but lower impact risk scenarios may not accurately reflect the true nature and severity of the risk. Explaining that the current level of risk is within tolerance may not convey the urgency and importance of addressing the risk. Explaining that an increase in threat events could cause a loss sooner than anticipated may not provide a clear and actionable solution for the risk. References = Four steps for managing risk at the CEO level, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, How to Communicate Risk to Stakeholders | Anitian

In order to efficiently execute a risk response action plan, it is most important for the emergency response team members to understand their defined roles and responsibilities. This can help to ensure that the team members know what they are expected to do, how they should coordinate and communicate with each other, and how they should report the progress and outcome of the risk response. The system architecture in target areas, IT management policies and procedures, and business objectives of the organization are other important factors, but they are not as important as the defined roles and responsibilities. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

The main benefit of using key risk indicators (KRIs) for an organization is that they provide an early warning that a risk threshold is about to be reached. KRIs are metrics that measure the likelihood and impact of risks, and help monitor and prioritize the most critical risks. KRIs also help to trigger timely and appropriate risk responses, before the risk becomes unmanageable or unacceptable. The other options are not the main benefit of using KRIs, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, page 4-36.

A risk assessment is a process of measuring and comparing the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizing them based on their significance and urgency. A risk assessmentcan help the organization to understand and document the risks that may affect its objectives and operations, and to support the decision making and planning for the risk management.
Performing a risk assessment would be the most helpful to understand the impact of a new technology system on an organization's current risk profile, because it can help the organization to address the following questions:
What are the potential benefits and challenges of implementing the new technology system, and how do they align with the organization's objectives and needs?
What are the existing or emerging risks that may affect the new technology system, and how do they relate to the organization's current risk profile?
How likely and severe are the risks that may affect the new technology system, and what are the possible consequences or impacts for the organization and its stakeholders?
How can the risks that may affect the new technology system be mitigated or prevented, and what are the available or feasible options or solutions?
Performing a risk assessment can help the organization to understand the impact of the new technology system on its current risk profile by providing the following benefits:
It can enable the comparison and evaluation of the current and desired state and performance of the organization's risk management function, and to identify and quantify the gaps or opportunities for improvement.
It can provide useful references and benchmarks for the alignment and integration of the new technology system with the organization's risk management function, and for the compliance with the organization's risk policies and standards.
It can support the implementation and monitoring of the new technology system, and for the allocation and optimization of the resources, time, and budget for the new technology system.
The other options are not the most helpful to understand the impact of a new technology system on an organization's current risk profile, because they do not provide the same level of detail and insight that performing a risk assessment provides, and they may not be specific or applicable to the organization's objectives and needs.
Hiring consultants specializing in the new technology means engaging or contracting external experts or professionals that have the skills and knowledge on the new technology system, and that can provide advice or guidance on the implementation and management of the new technology system. Hiring consultants specializing in the new technology can help the organization to enhance its competence and performance on the new technology system, but it is not the most helpful, because it does not measure and compare the likelihood and impact of the risks that may affect the new technology system, and it may not be relevant or appropriate for the organization's current risk profile.
Reviewing existing risk mitigation controls means examining and evaluating the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls or countermeasures that are intended to reduce or eliminate the risksthat may affect the organization's objectives and operations. Reviewing existing risk mitigation controls can help the organization to improve and optimize its risk management function, but it is not the most helpful, because it does not identify and prioritize the risks that may affect the newtechnology system, and it may not cover all the relevant or significant risks that may affect the new technology system.
Conducting a gap analysis means comparing and contrasting the current and desired state and performance of the organization's objectives and operations, and identifying and quantifying the gaps or differences that need to be addressed or corrected. Conducting a gap analysis can help the organization to identify and document its improvement needs and opportunities, but it is not the most helpful, because it does not measure and compare the likelihood and impact of the risks that may affect the new technology system, and it may not be aligned or integrated with the organization's current risk profile. References = ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 19-20, 23-24, 27-28, 31-32, 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-
59, 62-63
ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 208 CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The ultimate objective of utilizing key control indicators (KCIs) in the risk management process is to provide early warning signs of a potential change in risk level, as they indicate the performance and adequacy of the controls, and alert the stakeholders to any control gaps or deficiencies that may affect the risk exposure and impact. The other options are not the ultimate objectives, as they are more related to the insight, basis, or benchmark of the risk management process, respectively, rather than the early warning sign of the risk management process. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 110.