In comments to my “Why I Don’t Like CRISC” article, Oliver writes: CobIT allows to segregate what is called IT in analysable parts. Different Risk models apply to those parts. e.g. Information Security, Architecture, Project management. In certain areas the risk models are more mature (Infosec / Project Management) and in certain they are not [...]
Filed under: Science of Risk Management by alex on Friday, July 2, 2010 | Social tagging: CRISC > risk > risk analysis > risk management > risk modeling > risk science
6 Comments »
Longtime readers know that I’m not the biggest fan of GRC as it is “practiced” today. I believe G & C are subservient to risk management. So let me offer you this statement to chew on: “A metric for Governance is only useful inasmuch as it describes an ability to manage risk” True or False, [...]
Filed under: argument, Doing it Differently, Science of Risk Management by alex on Tuesday, December 15, 2009 | Social tagging: GRC > metrics > risk management > risk modeling > risk science > Science of Risk Management > security management > Security Models
15 Comments »
Our friend Rich Mogull has an interesting post up on his blog called “Always Assume“. In it, he offers that “assumption” is part of a normal scenario building process, something that is fairly inescapable when making business decisions. And he offers a simple, pragmatic process for assumptions which is mainly scenario development, justification, and action. [...]
Filed under: Science of Risk Management by alex on Friday, November 13, 2009 | Social tagging: Rich Mogull > risk management > risk science > Science of Risk Management
No Comments »