The ultimate goal of conducting a privacy impact analysis (PIA) is to identify gaps in data protection controls, as it involves assessing the privacy risks and impacts of collecting, using, storing, and disclosing personally identifiable information (PII), and determining the adequacy and effectiveness of the existing or proposed controls to mitigate those risks and impacts. Developing a customer notification plan, identifying PII, and determining gaps in data identification processes are possible steps or outcomes of conducting a PIA, but they are not the ultimate goal, as they do not address the root cause or solution of the privacy issues. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 155.

A heat map is a graphical representation of the organization's risk profile that shows the relative level of risk for each risk category or event. A heat map uses colors, shapes, or symbols to indicate the magnitude and likelihood of each risk, as well as its trend and status. A heat map offers the simplest overview of changes in the organization's risk profile, as it allows the risk decision-makers to quickly identify the most significant risks, the areas of improvement or deterioration, and the gaps or overlaps in risk management. A heat map can also be used to communicate the risk profile to senior management and other stakeholders in a clear and concise manner. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: IT Risk Assessment Methods and Techniques, Page 77; Future Risks: How organizations see changes in risk management - Aon.

Business process owners are the most important to include in the assessment of existing IT risk scenarios, as they have the authority and responsibility to manage the business processes and their associated risks and controls, and to provide the business perspective and requirements for the IT risk scenarios. Technology subject matter experts, business users of IT systems, and risk management consultants are not the most important to include, as they may have different roles and responsibilities related to the technical, operational, or advisory aspects of IT risk scenarios, respectively, but they do not own the business processes or the IT risk scenarios. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 101.

The primary purpose of using a framework for risk analysis is to improve consistency. A framework for risk analysis is a set of principles, standards, methods, and tools that guide and govern the risk analysis process.
Risk analysis is the process of estimating the impact and likelihood of the risk events, and determining the level and nature of the risk exposure. A framework for risk analysis helps to improve consistency, which is the degree of uniformity and agreement among the risk analysis results and practices. Improving consistency helps to ensure that the risk analysis is performed in a systematic and structured way, and that the risk analysis results are comparable and reliable. Improving consistency also helps to reduce the bias, uncertainty, and variability in the risk analysis process, and to enhance the quality and accuracy of the risk analysis results.
Improving accountability, helping define risk tolerance, and helping develop risk scenarios are not the primary purposes of using a framework for risk analysis, as they are either the benefits or the objectives of the risk analysis process, and they do not address the primary need of improving the quality and reliability of the risk analysis results. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 49.

The best course of action to determine the root cause of the high number of policy exceptions approved by senior management is to interview the control owner. The control owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for designing, implementing, and monitoring the controls that enforce the policy. The control owner can provide insight into the reasons, circumstances, and impacts of the policy exceptions, and the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls. The control owner can also suggest possible improvements or alternatives to the policy or the controls. The other options are not as useful as interviewing the control owner, as they are related to the review, analysis, or testing of the policy or the controls, not the investigation or understanding of the policy exceptions. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.4: Key Control Indicators, page 211.